ts\ 

QJ> 


(Si 


I 


REVIEW 


OF 


THE  MEXICAN  ¥AR, 


EMBRACING 


THE  CAUSES  OF  THE  WAR, 

THE 

RESPONSIBILITY  OF  ITS  COMMENCEMENT, 


PURPOSKS  OF  THE  AMKKICAN  GnVKUNMKXT  TN  ITS  PROS* 
ITS  BKNKMT3  AM)  i 


BY  CHARLES  T.  POETEB. 


Sed  Los  TenssUauni,  sine  sumaa  justitla  Eempublicam  reffi  noa  pcia*. 


AUBt'RN,  N.  Y. 
ALDEN  &  PAilSONS,  67  QENESKB  STREET, 


Entered  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  one  thousand  eight 
hundred  and  forty-nine,  by 

ALDEN    &    PARSONS, 

In  the  Clerk't-  Oilice  of  the  United  States,  for  the  Northern  District  of 
New-York. 


JINN  &  ROCKWELL   PRINTERS. 
AUBURN,  N.  T. 


HI  01 


PREFACE. 


IT  is  the  object  of  this  essay  to  exhibit  the  true  character  of  the  war 
in  which  our  country  has  lately  been  engaged.  It  aims  to  present  in 
a  clear  and  concise  manner  the  facts  and  considerations  which  will  enable 
the  reader  to  form  a  correct  opinion  concerning  the  causes  of  this  contest, 
and  the  motives  and  the  excuses  for  its  prosecution. 

It  is  its  further  design  to  give  a  view  of  the  consequences  of  the  war ;  to 
examine  the  benefit?  which  have  been  attributed  to  it,  and  the  evils,  near 
and  remote,  of  which  it  has  been  the  cause ;  to  present  the  duty  and  the 
true  glory  and  ambition  of  the  Ui:ited  States  ;  and  to  point  out  the  man 
ner  in  which  alone  peace  can  be  established  amoi.g  civilized  nations. 

It  contains  no  allusion  to  political  parties.  It  is  no  part  of  its  object 
to  inquire  what  share  belongs  to  each  of  the  glory  or  the  shamo  of  this 
war.  The  subject  of  slavery  it  has  been  the.  endeavor  of  the  author  to 
avoid.  The  belief  that  the  acquisition  of  territory  for  the  sole  purpose 
of  extending  and  perpetuating  slavery  has  been  the  undivided  purpose  of 
our  government  and  people  for  twenty-five  years  ;  that  for  this  Texas  was 
settled ;  that  urged  by  this  motive  alone,  our  citizens  flew  to  the  assist 
ance  of  that  State  in  her  efforts  to  establish  her  independence,  and 
government  winked  at  their  participation  in  her  struggle ;  that  for  this 
alone  Texas  was  annexed  *  that  for  this  alone  war  wns  undertaken  ;  that 
government  would  never  have  sought  this  contest,  had  it  apprehended 
that  any  portion  of  the  territory  which  it  desired  would  ever  be  secured 
to  freedom ;  this  belief  is  one  to  which  he  cannot  subscribe. 


PREFACE. 


It  cannot  be  proven  that  the  war  had  any  necessary  connection  with  sla 
very.  Annexation  certainly  was  not  its  cause  ;  it  only  furnished  an  occa 
sion  for  it.  The  circumstances,  so  far  as  they  are  yet  known,  seem  best  to 
warrant  the  belief  that  it  was  waged  for  the  acquisition  of  territory,  irre 
spective  of  the  character  which  after  legislation  might  impress  upon  that 
territory.  It  was  sustained  alike  by  the  north  and  the  soulh.  The  spirit 
which  impelled  to  it  was  confined  to  no  section  of  the  country.  Tho 
north  rivalled  the  south  in  greediness  after  the  possessions  of  another, 
and  in  causeless  vindictiveness  toward  a  weak  and  distracted  nation. 

The  war  is  here  considered  as  an  act,  the  responsibility  of  which  rests 
upon  the  people  of  the  United  State-,  the  whole  people,  the  mass  of 
whom,  without  distinction  of  section  or  of  party,  either  aided  in  its  com 
mencement  or  sympathized  with  its  objects  and  united  in  its  prosecution. 

The  work  must  stand  or  fall,  according  to  its  own  merits.  If  the  views 
advanced  in  it  are  sound,  and  its  arguments  have  weight,  it  will  proba 
bly  make  its  way  ,  if  not,  it  must  suffer  the  consequences.  If  it  is  wor 
thy  of  being  read,  it  doubtless  will  be  ;  if  it  is  unworthy,  it  will  be  unfor 
tunate  for  the  publisher. 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  I. 

Ir»TTtoT>UCTioN.  Annexation  of  Texas.  The  Occasion  of  the  Wnr. 
Influences  which  led  to  Annexation.  Geographical  unity.  Political  sym 
pathy.  Desire  of  the  South  to  increase  her  weight  in  the  1'nion.  Fear 
of  British  encroachment.  Supposed  military  advantages  of  Texas.  Tho 
resolution  of  Congress. 


CHAPTER  II. 

ANNEXATION  continued.  Justness  of  the  act  toward  Mexico.  The 
right  of  Mexico  to  sovereignty  over  Texas.  If  possessed  at  all  after  her 
revolution  of  183J-'3o,  lost  afterwards  by  her  neglect  to  enforce  it.  Her 
clnim  in  effect  abandoned.  Texas  became  independent  of  right  hy  the 
Mexican  revolution  of  1334* '35.  Expediency  of  annexation.  To  he 
considered  here  only  so  far  as  it  effected  our  relations  with  Mexico. 


CHAPTER  III. 

A  VIEW  of  some  of  the  leading  events  in  the  intercourse  between  tho 
two  countries,  from  August,  1843.  to  October  1S45  ;  showing  that  the 
design  of  declaring  war  Against  the  United  States  on  account  of  annexa 
tion,  if  ever  seriously  entertained  by  Mexico,  was  at  the  last  date  entirely 
abandoned.  The  advance  to  Corpus  Christi. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

THE  Mission  of  Mr.  Slidell.     The  tefusal  to  receive  him.     Political 
situation  of  Mexico  on  the  arrival  of  our  Minister.     Her  conduct  con- 


CONTENTS. 


sistent.  Duty  of  the  United  States.  The  course  adopted  by  our  gov 
ernment.  Fall  of  Herrera.  The  refusal  to  send  a  commissioner  threw 
upon  our  government  the  responsibility  of  future  hostilities. 


CHAPTER  V. 

THE  advance  of  our  Army  to  the  Rio  Grande.  Thii  movement  a  vio 
lation  of  the  rights  of  Mexico,  which  had  been  recognized  by  our  Gov 
ernment  itself. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

THE  advance  to  the  Rio  Grande  an  invasion  of  the  territory  of  Mexi 
co.  Louisiana  as  ceded  to  us  by  France  in  1803  extended  no  farther 
west  than  to  the  Neuces.  This  river  the  western  boundary  of  the  Span 
ish  province  of  Texas  prior  to  1820.  The  same  river  the  boundary  of 
the  Mexican  State  of  Texas.  Texas  after  her  independence  never  in 
uny  legal  manner  enlarged  her  territory.  The  strip  of  country  in  ques 
tion  in  the  exclusive  possession  of  Mexico  in  184G.  Government  aware 
at  the  time  the  order  for  the  advance  was  issued  that  it  would  be  an  inva- 


CHAPTER  VII. 

THE  Invasion  of  Mexico  the  sole  cause  of  the  War.  Tone  of  the 
Mexican  Minister.  Proclamation  of  Mejia.  Progress  of  General  Tay 
lor.  Order  of  Paredes.  His  Proclamation.  Letter  of  Ampudia.  Aris 
ta  gives  notice  that  he  shall  prosecute  hostilities. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

THE  Object  of  this  movement  of  our  Army.  The  reason  given  by  the 
Executive  not  the  real  motive,  as  proved  by  the  circumstances  «..f  the 
case,  and  by  the  dispatches  to  Mr.  Slidell.  The  provocations  urged  by  our 
government  considered.  The  war  designed  to  be  brought  about  in  such 
a  manner  as  to  throw  on  Mexico  the  odium  of  its  commencement. 


CHAPTER  IX. 

THE  Declaratiou  of  War.     The  duty  of  Congress.     The  consequen 
ces  which  would  have  followed  the  performance  of  that  duty. 

CHAPTER  X. 

THE  Objects  of  the  War.     Conquest.      Its  Progress.     The  Treaty 
of  peace. 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  XL 

THK  Benefits  of  the  War  considered.  The  payment  of  the  claims  of 
our  citizens  against  Mexico,  The  acquisition  of  territory.  Value  of  this 
conquest  to  the  United  States,  and  to  the  cause  of  freedom. 


CHAPTER  XII. 

THE  Evils  attending  the  War.  Its  Expense.  Its  Loss  of  Life — in  bat 
tle — by  disease. 

CHAPTER,  XIII. 

THK  Duty  of  the  United  States  toward  other  nations  enhanced  by  her 
position.  Her  dutv  to  Mexico,  in  particular?  These  duties  violated  by 
his  War. 


CHAPTER  XIV. 

THE  Influence  of  this  War  upon  our  national  character,  nnd  on  tha 
cause  of  Liberty  and  of  Christianity  at  home  and  abroad.  It  has  intro 
duced  crime  and  vice  among  us.  It  has  awakened  a  spirit  of  conquest. 
It  has  lowered  the  standard  of  public  morality  in  our  country. 


CHAPTER  XV. 

OF  the  establishment  of  permanent  peace  among  civilized  nations. 
The  means  by  which  this  object  can  be  attained.  The  necessity  which 
will  justify  a  nation  in  resorting  to  arms.  Prospect  of  the  triumph  of 
peace. 


REVIEW 

OF 

THE  MEXICAN  ¥AB, 


CHAPTEK    I. 


Annexation  of  Texas.  The  occnsion  of  the,  Wnr.  In 
fluences  which  led  to  annexation.  Geographical  Unity.  Political 
sympathy.  Desire  of  the  Sou'h  to  increase  her  weight  in  the  Union. 
Fear  of  British  encroachment.  Supposed  military  advantages  of 
Texas.  The  resolution  of  Congress. 

THE  war  with.  Mexico  lias  become  matter 
of  history.  The  excitement  inseparable  from 
contention,  which  few  minds  are  able  to  resist, 
has  passed  away ;  and  calm  reflection  comes, 
as  is  too  usual  in  human  affairs,  after  the  action 
which  it  should  have  preceded. 

We  intend  in  the  following  pages  to  present 
a  review  of  this  war,  in  which  it  shall  be  our 
aim  to  state  historical  facts  with  accuracy,  and 
to  examine  them  by  the  principles  of  Christiani 
ty  and  an  enlightened  statesmanship.  We  shall 
ta,ke  a  full  survey  of  the  causes  which  led  to 


10  REVIEW  OF  THE 


this  contest,  and  point  out  the  means  which 
should  have  been  adopted  by  our  government 
to  prevent  it.  We  shall  examine  its  objects, 
as  well  as  its  benefits  and  evils,  both  immedi 
ate  and  remote,  and  shall  endeavor  to  explain 
the  human  agencies  which  may  bs  employed 
to  hasten  the  time  when  nations  shall  learn  war 
no  more.  And  may  the  minds  of  our  country 
men  be  so  seriously  led  to  the  consideration  of 
this  event,  that  its  history  shall  be  an  instruc 
tion  and  a  warning  to  us  and  to  our  children 
forever. 

The  annexation  of  Texas  to  the  United  States 
must  be  regarded  as  the  primary  occasion  of 
the  war,  since  had  that  measure  not  been  adopt 
ed  the  circumstances  out  of  which  the  war  arose 
could  never  have  existed.  Viewing;  it  in  this 

o 

light,  we  shall,  before  proceeding  to  those  events 
which  were  the  more  immediate  causes  of  the 
contest,  devote,  a  few  pages  to  its  examination. 
The  influences  which  led  to  annexation  were 
numerous  and  varied.  The  impression  had 
become  general  among  our  citizens  that  the 
United  States,  by  the  treaty  of  1819,  surren 
dered  to  Spain  a  part  of  the  western  valley  of 
the  Mississippi,  and  a  strong  desire  existed  to 
recover  it.  This  desire  arose  in  part  from  the 


MEXICAN  WAR. 


fact  that  the  country  was  contiguous  to  our 
own,  and  was  separated  from  us  by  no  natu 
ral  boundary,  as  well  as  from  its  commercial 
advantages,  the  mildness  of  its  climate,  and  the 
fertility  of  its  soil.  It  originated  partly,  also, 
in  an  ambition  for  the  undivided  ownership  of 
that  vast  region  whose  waters  uniting  in  the 
Mississippi  declare  its  geographical  unity.  The 
inhabitants  of  Texas  were  mostly  emigrants 
from  the  United  States. 

There  appeared,  also,  other  considerations, 
some  of  a  general,  others  of  a  sectional  nature, 
by  which  the  country  was  then  strongly  agita 
ted,  and  the  effect  of  which,  undoubtedly,  was 
to  hasten  annexation.  The  southern  states 
generally  advocated  the  immediate  adoption  of 
the  measure  for  two  reasons.  The  slavehold- 
ing  and  planting  interest  was  in  the  minority 
in  congress.  The  admission  of  two  new  north 
ern  states  was  anticipated,  and  the  acquisition 
of  Texas  would  tend  to  equalize  northern  and 
southern  representation,  especially  in  the  sen 
ate.  They  insisted,  moreover,  and  at  the  time 
it  was  generally  believed,  that  it  was  the  de 
sign  of  England  to  procure  the  abolition  of 
slavery  in  Texas,  and  that  object  effected,  to 
undermine  the  institution  in  this  country.  It 


12  REVIEW  OF  THE 


was  declared,  that  with  them  the  question  of 
annexation  was  one  of  self-preservation.  The 
ultimate  design  of  Great  Britain  many  appre 
hended  to  be  no  less  than  to  establish  her  own 
authority  in  Texas,  or  at  least  to  form  an  alli 
ance  offensive  and  defensive  with  that  state ; 
and  it  was  urged,  that  were  the  union  again 
refused,  a  wide  door  would  be  opened  for  her 
success ;  that  not  only  might  we  loose  Texas 
forever,  but  California  and  the  future  com 
merce  of  the  Pacific,  which  that  power  was 
thought  to  aim  at,  might  fall  into  her  posses 
sion. 

It  was  still  further  contended  that  the  im 
mediate  possession  of  Texas  was  necessary  to 
our  future  national  safety ;  that  it  would  con 
stitute  a  bulwark  against  foreign  invasion ;  and 
that  if  refused  noAv,  when  offered  to  our  accept 
ance,  it  might  be  desired  by  us  in  vain  in  an 
hour  of  emergency. 

The  effect  of  these  arguments  on  the  popu 
lar  mind  was  doubtless  heightened  by  the  very 
uncertainty  in  which  they  were  wrapped,  and 
the  apparent  urgency  perhaps  caused  many 
objections  to  the  measure  to  be  lightly  consid 
ered  which  under  ordinary  circumstances  might 
for  the  time  have  caused  its  rejection. 


MEXICAN  WAR.  13 


In  February,  1845,  congress  by  joint  reso 
lution  consented  "  that  the  territory  properly 
included  within  and  rightfully  belonging  to 
the  republic  of  Texas  be  erected  into  a  state" 
on  certain  conditions,  one  of  which  was,  that 
it  should  be  "subject  to  the  adjustment  by 
this  government  of  all  questions  of  boundary 
that  may  arise  with  other  governments."  The 
terms  of  annexation  having  been  accepted  by 
Texas,  congress  in  December  following  declar 
ed,  "  that  the  state  of  Texas  shall  be  one,  and 
is  hereby  declared  to  be  one  of  the  United 
States  of  America." 


14  REVIEW  OF  THE 


CHAPTER    II. 


ANNEXATION  continued.  Justness  of  the  act  toward  Mexico.  The  right 
of  Mexico  to  sovereignty  over  Texas.  If  possessed  at  all  after  her 
revolution  of  1834-'35,  lost  afterwards  by  her  neglect  to  enforce  it. 
Her  claim  in  effect  abandoned.  Texas  be  same  independent  of  right 
by  the  Mexican  revolution  of  1334-'35.  Expediency  of  annexation. 
Annexation  to  be  considered  here  only  so  far  as  it  effected  our  rela 
tions  with  Mexico. 

IN  considering  this  act  of  our  government, 
the  question  first  arises,  was  the  measure  just 
toward  Mexico.  That  republic  contended  that 
Texas  was  an  integral  part  of  her  territory,  a 
rebellious  province  which  she  intended  to  sub 
due  ;  and  she  denounced  the  annexation  as  a 
violation  by  the  United  States  of  their  neutral 
ity  and  treaty  stipulations,  as  a  national  rob 
bery,  and  as  one  of  the  greatest  outrages  re 
corded  in  history. 

We  believe  that  this  claim  and  charge  were 
entirely  without  foundation ;  that  in  this  pro 
ceeding  the  United  States  did  not  violate  their 
neutrality  or  their  treaty,  nor  interfere  in  the 
least  with  any  right  of  Mexico.  This  we  shall 
endeavor  to  show. 


MEXICAN  WAR.  15 


The  common  consent  of  mankind  has  fixed 
a  limitation  to  national  claims,  and  assigned  a 
period  to  the  right  of  re-conquest.  It  has  be 
come  a  law  of  nations,  that  if  a  claim  of  sove 
reignty  is  not  prosecuted  with  adequate  means, 
and  within  a  reasonable  period,  the  government 
asserting  it  must  suffer  the  consequences  of  its 
inaction.  Other  nations  have  a  right  to  regard 
its  pretension  as  abandoned,  and  to  consider 
any  subsequent  attempt  to  enforce  it  as  a  wrong 
ful  invasion.  Mexico  herself  furnishes  an  illus 
tration  in  point.  Spain  refused  to  acknowledge 
her  independence  for  more  than  fifteen  years 
after  its  establishment.  She  protested  against 
its  recognition  by  other  powers,  declaring  her 
determination  to  re-conquer  her  lost  possessions. 
But  the  world  treated  her  in  all  respects  ,as  in 
dependent  de  jure,  and  the  United  States  in 
1825,  '2  Y  and  '29,  considered  her  competent  to 
convey  a  perfect  title  to  Texas.  The  last  was 
thought  to  be  a  favorable  occasion  to  renew 
the  offer  for  the  purchase  of  that  territory,  as 
Mexico  would  need  the  purchase  money  in  re 
sisting  "the  Spanish  invasion." 

Let  us  apply  this  well-established  principle 
to  the  present  case.  At  the  time  of  the  an 
nexation  Texas  had  been  independent  of  Mex- 


16  REVIEW  OF  THE 


ico  for  nine  years.  Her  independence  had. 
been  recognized  by  the  United  States,  England, 
France,  Belgium,  and  Holland.  Mexico  had 
protested  against  these  acts,  had  declared  her 
determination  to  re-conquer  that  state,  and 
had  waged,  on  paper,  a  furious  war  against  it. 
But,  with  a  single  exception,  Texas  remained 
all  that  time  in  undisturbed  tranquility,  doing 
"all  those  acts  and  things  which  independent 
states  may  of  right  do,"  attracting  by  her  equal 
laws,  her  genial  climate  and  fertile  soil  emi 
grants  from  all  parts  of  the  world,  developing 
her  resources,  and  increasing  in  strength  and 
stability. 

The  exception  to  wdiich  we  have  alluded  oc 
curred  in  the  year  1842,  when  Mexico  sent 
three  marauding  expeditions  into  Texas  to  pil 
lage  her  defenceless  border  settlements.  The 
first  party  of  seven  hundred  took  the  village 
of  San  Antonio.  The  second,  numbering  about 
eight  hundred,  attacking  a  company  of  some 
two  hundred  emigrants,  were  defeated  and 
driven  out  of  the  country.  The  third,  a  mot 
ley  collection  of  nearly  thirteen  hundred  men. 
took  San  Antonio  a  second  time  by  surprise. 
Pursued  by  a  small  body  of  Texans  under 
General  Somerville,  they  hastily  retreated,  car- 


MEXICAN  WAR.  17 


rying  away,  however,  the  judges  and  attend 
ants  of  the  court  then  in  session,  with  other 
unarmed  a  ad  peaceful  citizens  into  captivity 
After  the  battle  of  San  Jacinto,  these  three 
barbarous,  plundering  expeditions,  not  one  of 
which  remained  in  the  country  longer  than 
eight  days,  were  the  only  hostile  attacks  which 
Mexico  had  made  on  the  territory  of  Texas. 

Our  secretary  of  state,  Mr.  Webster,  says 
in  1842  :  "  From  the  battle  of  San  Jacinto  the 
war  was  at  an  end."  "  Mexico  may  choose  to 
consider  Texas  as  a  rebellious  province,  but 
the  world  has"  been  obliged  to  take  a  very  dif 
ferent  view  of  the  matter."  "Texas  has  ex 
hibited  the  same  external  signs  of  national  in 
dependence  as  Mexico  herself."  "Practically 
free  and  independent,  acknowledged  as  a  po 
litical  sovereignty  by  the  principal  powers  of 
the  world,  no  hostile  foot  finding  rest  within 
her  territory  for  six  or  seven  years,  and  Mexi 
co  herself  refraining  for  all  that  period  from 
any  further  attempt  to  re-establish  her  own 
authority,  the  United  States  must  consider 
Texas  as  an  independent  sovereignty  as  much 
as  Mexico."  "  How  long,  let  it  be  asked,  in 
the  judgment  of  Mexico  herself,"  he  inquires, 
"  is  the  fact  of  actual  independence  to  be  held 


18  REVIEW  OF  THE 


of  no  avail  against  an  avowed  purpose  of  fu 
ture  re-conquest  ?"• 

Three  years  of  continued  inaction  had  suc 
ceeded  the  six  or  seven  to  which  Mr.  "Webster 
alludes.  For  nine  successive  years,  then,  Mex 
ico  had  not  made  a  single  attempt  to  establish 
her  claim ;  for  the  incursions  before  described 
were  entirely  inadequate  and  useless,  and  evi 
dently  not  designed  as  attempts  to  effect  any 
such  object.  They  cannot  be  allowed  to  have 
had  any  higher  purpose  than  injury  and  plun 
der.  Certainly,  if  the  claim  of  Mexico  could 
not  then  be  considered  as  abandoned,  and  the 
rightful  independence  of  Texas  as  established, 
it  would  be  very  difficult  to  say  at  what  period 
such  a  judgment  would  have  been  warranted. 

All  publicists  agree,  that  a  nation's  right  to 
lost  possessions  ceases  when  all  probable  hope 
of  recovery  is  at  an  end.  And  this  is  a  rea 
sonable  and  just  rule ;  because  the  rights  of  in 
dividuals  and  states  cannot  be  suffered  to  re 
main  suspended,  while  an  unreasonable  nation 
persists  in  indulging  its  spleen,  and  in  exhibit 
ing  its  obstinacy.  Now  Mexico  was  notorious 
ly  unable  to  re-conquer  Texas.  She  was  as 
serting  a  claim,  the  enforcement  of  which,  al 
ways  hopeless,  had  grown  for  nine  years  more 


MEXICAN  WAK.  19 


and  more  manifestly  impossible.  An  obli 
gation  rests  upon  all  nations  to  enforce,  or 
to  abandon  their  claims  of  sovereignty.  The 
right  to  re-assert  them  does  not  descend,  as 
Mexico  contended,  to  children  and  children's 
children.  A  claim,  as  our  secretary  of  state, 
Mr.  Upsher,  very  justly  declared,  must  be 
enforced  seasonably,  or  abandoned  for  the 
peace  and  commerce  of  the  rest  of  the  world. 
The  history  of.  Europe  presents  several  in 
stances  in  which  her  states  have  united  to 
compel  obedience  to  this  just  rule.  Eng 
land,  at  that  time  the  greatest  power  in  the 
world,  recognized  this  obligation,  and  after 
vainly  endeavoring  to  reduce  the  American 
colonies  to  submission,  when  she  saw  that  the 
attempt  was  hopeless,  immediately  acknow 
ledged  them  to  be  free  and  independent.  But 
Mexico  sat  like  the  dog  in  the  manger,  and  it 
was  the  light,  nay,  it  was  the  duty  of  all  na 
tions  to  disregard  her  threatening  and  her 
claims.  Moreover,  by  an  express  act  she  ac 
knowledged  this  obligation,  in  consenting  to 
recognize  the  independence  of  Texas,  if  the 
latter  would  stipulate  not  to  become  annexed 
to  the  United  States.  Now  in  view  of  these 
plain  facts,  to  what  judgment  can  a  candid 


20  REVIEW  OF  THE 


world  arrive,  except  that  at  the  time  of  the 
annexation  Mexico  had  forfeited  and  lost  any 
sovereignty  over  Texas  -which  she  might  be 
fore  have  possessed. 

But  moreover,  this  claim  of  Mexico  was  in 
the  beginning  unfounded  and  unjust.  Texas, 
by  the  Mexican  revolution  of  1834-'35,  became 
of  right  as  well  as  in  fact  independent,  and 
Mexico  at  that  time,  by  her  own  act,  lost  her 
former  sovereignty  over  her.  On  the  estab 
lishment  of  the  constitutional  government  in 
1824,  Texas,  by  a  decree  of  the  congress  of 
Mexico,  was  united  with  Coahuila,  as  a  "  con 
stituent  and  sovereign  state  of  the  Mexican 
confederacy." 

The  principles  on  which  that  union  was 
founded  appears  not  to  differ  in  any  essential 
particular  from  those  of  our  own.  The  con 
stitution  declared  the  Mexican  government  to 
be  a  "  popular,  representative,  federal  repub 
lic."  The  powers  of  its  congress,  and  the  ju 
risdiction  of  its  supreme  court,  were  similar  to 
those  of  the  United  States. 

The  constitution  of  Coahuila  and  Texas,  sanc 
tioned  by  the  general  government,  declared 
that  state  to  be  "  free  and  independent  of  the 
other  Mexican  states,"  and  that  the  sovereign- 


MEXICAN  WAR. 


ty  of  the  state  resided  "originally  and  essen 
tially  in  the  great  mass  of  the  individuals  who 
compose  it."  That  instrument  also  declared, 
that  "in  all  matters  relating  to  the  Mexican 
confederacy,  the  state  delegates  its  faculties 
and  powers  to  the  general  congress ;  "but  in 
all  that  properly  relates  to  the  government  of 
the  state,  it  retains  its  liberty,  independence 
and  sovereignty." 

In  the  year  1834,  Santa  Anna,  then  presi 
dent  of  Mexico,  at  the  head  of  the  army,  dis 
solved  the  federal  congress,  and  abolished  the 
council  of  government,  whose  authority  he 
took  into  his  own  hands.  A  detachment  of 
troops  at  the  same  time  entered  the  territory 
of  Texas,  demanded  the  surrender  of  several 
of  her  principal  citizens,  and  in  accordance 
with  a  general  order,  attempted  to  disarm  the 
inhabitants.  The  people  of  Texas  resisted 
these  demands,  protected  their  fellow-citizens, 
and  drove  the  army  from  their  soil.  They 
then  published  a  manifesto,  in  which  they  de 
clared  that  Santa  Anna  had  broken  the  polit 
ical  compact  of  "Mexico,  that  the  government 
unconstitutionally  established  by  that  usurper 
had  no  authority  over  Texas,  and  that  the 
people  of  that  state  were  no  longer  morally 


22  REVIEW  OF  THE 


or  civilly  bound  by  the  compact  of  union. 
They  declared  that  they  had  taken  up  arms 
only  to  resist  tyranny  and  to  uphold  the  con 
stitution,  and  that  they  were  ready  to  assist 
the  other  Mexican  states  in  re-establishing  the 
republic. 

It  is  plain  that  in  this  Santa  Anna,  and  not 
Texas,  rebelled  against  the  government.  There 
existed  no  difference  between  her  obligation  to 
defend  that  government  and  her  own  liberties 
against  him,  and  her  obligation  to  defend  them 
against  a  foreign  invader,  intent  upon  their 
destruction. 

In  the  following  year  Santa  Anna,  by  a  mil 
itary  edict,  transformed  the  states  into  depart 
ments,  and  clothed  the  general  government 
with  the  entire  sovereignty.  Many  of  the 
states  declared  against  this  outrage.  Of  these, 
some  were  reduced  to  obedience  by  force,  and 
against  others,  from  which  a  more  formidable 
resistance  was  apprehended,  the  basest  treach 
ery  was  employed  to  eifect  their  subjection. 

Having  at  length  secured  a  supremacy  in 
the  other  states,  Santa  Anna  dissolved  the  le 
gislature  of  Coahuila  and  Texas  at  the  point 
of  the  bayonet,  and  marched  to  the  subjuga 
tion  of  the  latter. 


MEXICAN  WAR.  v  23 


That  state,  after  tlie  overthrow  of  the  gov 
ernment,  the  destruction  of  the  federal  consti 
tution,  and  the  final  submission  of  the  other 
states  to  the  usurper,  on  the  2nd  of  March, 
1836,  declared  herself  independent,  and  in  the 
following  month  established  her  declaration 
by  overthrowing  the  Mexican  army  on  the 
plains  of  San  Jaciuto  and  driving  its  wreck 
beyond  her  borders. 

By  this  successful  resistance  against  the  rev 
olution  in  Mexico,  Texas  preserved  the  sove 
reignty  which  she  had  possessed  under  the  con 
stitution,  and  of  which  Santa  Anna  had  failed 
to  deprive  her,  and  regained  that  which  she  had 
delegated  to  the  general  congress,  and  thus  be 
came  an  independent  sovereign  state,  in.  the 
fullest  sense  of  that  term.  For  the  mere  edict 
of  Santa  Anna  was  of  no  effect  to  take  away 
her  rights  from  Texas ;  she  could  loose  them 
only  by  voluntary  or  necessary  surrender.  By 
the  theory  of  the  Mexican  government  all 
sovereignty  resided  originally  in  the  people, 
and  the  general  government  possessed  such 
powers  and  such  only  as  the  people  by  their 
constitution  had  granted  to  it.  When  the  go 
vernment  which  the  people  had  instituted  was 
destroyed,  the  depositary  of  this  power  no  Ion- 


24  REVIEW  OF  THE 


ger  existing,  the  grant,  which  could  not  remain 
in  abeyance,  reverted  to  the  people. 

The  government  established  by  Santa  Anna 
could  not  exercise  rightful  jurisdiction  over 
Texas,  for  no  competent  authority  had  granted 
to  it  the  power.  The  only  restraint  on  the 
entire  sovereignty  of  Texas  was  contained  in 
the  constitution  of  the  United  Mexican  States. 
The  binding  force  of  that  instrument  having 
been  destroyed,  the  only  restraint  upon  her 
was  gone,  and  she  was  by  the  usurping  act  of 
Santa  Anna  free  and  independent.  Her  dec 
laration  was  only  the  announcement  of  a  fact 
that  existed  without  her  agency,  and  which 
undeclared  would  have  been  no  less  a  fact. 

It  will  be  observed  that  the  revolution  was 
not  by  Texas,  but  against  her.  Its  object  was 
to  change  her  from  an  independent  state  to  a 
province  of  a  consolidated  military  power.  If 
her  independence  had  rested  on  the  right  of 
revolution,  it  would  have  existed  subject  for  a 
time  to  the  right  of  re-conquest.  Her  inde 
pendence  de  jure  would  not  be  established  un 
til  it  had  been  acknowledged  by  her  former 
government,  or  the  right  to  re-conquer  her  had 
been  lost  by  neglect.  But  she  had  never  re 
volted.  The  revolution  in  Mexico,  failing  to 


MEXICAN  WAR  25 


despoil  Her  of  the  sovereignty  which,  she  pos 
sessed  as  a  state  of  that  confederacy,  and  de 
stroying  the  only  political  restraint,  the  only 
superior  government  which  she  had  before 
known,  left  her  entirely  free  and  sovereign. 

It  follows,  then,  that  the  invasion  of  Texas 
in  1836  was  an  attempt  by  a  foreign  tyrant  to 
conquer  an  independent  state,  to  subjugate  a 
free  people ;  and  that  the  recognition  of  her 
independence  by  the  government  of  Santa 
Anna,  or  its  successors,  was  no  more  necessary 
to  its  completeness  than  would  have  been  its 
acknowledgment  by  any  other  government 
which  had  never  exercised  sovereignty  over 
her,  and  to  which,  she  had  never  owed  allegi 
ance. 

From  these  considerations  it  follows,  that 
the  annexation  of  Texas  to  the  United  States 
was  a  measure  which  involved  no  right  of 
Mexico,  and  which  furnished  to  her  no  cause 
of  complaint. 

It  is  said  that  war  existed  betAveen  the  two 
countries,  and  that  by  the  annexation  we  as 
sumed  the  war.  It  follows  from  what  we  have 
seen,  that  if  Mexico  had  then  renewed  her  war 
against  Texas,  it  would  have  been  an  unjust 
invasion.  However,  then,  the  question  should 


26  REVIEW  OF  THE 


have  been  considered  in  the  light  of  expedi 
ency,  it  is  clear  that  our  duty  to  Mexico  did 
not  require  us  to  refrain  from  the  adoption  of 
the  measure  because  an  unjust  invasion  by  her 
might  be  apprehended.  We  arrive  then  at  the 
conclusion  that  this  act  of  our  government  was 
consistent  with  exact  justice  to  Mexico. 

But  this  is  not  the  only  view  of  the  case 
which  our  subject  presents.  There  arises  in 
the  consideration  of  this  measure  another  ques 
tion  scarcely  inferior  in  interest  and  impor 
tance:  Was  it  the  part  of  wisdom  at  that 
time  to  exercise  this  right  which  the  United 
States  possessed  ? 

It  does  not  belong  to  us  in  this  essay,  be  it 
understood,  to  examine  the  domestic  questions 
to  which  annexation  gave  rise,  or  to  discuss 
the  character  of  that  measure  as  viewed  in  a 
domestic  light.  Its  consideration  lies  within 
the  province  of  this  work  only  so  far  as  it  ef 
fected  our  relations  with  Mexico,  and  was  the 
occasion  of  the  war. 

Was  the  annexation  of  Texas  expedient  and 
right,  in  view  of  the  eifects  upon  our  relations 
with  Mexico,  which  might  reasonably  have 
been  apprehended  from  it?  This  is  the  only 
question  which  remains  for  us  to  examine ;  with 


MEXICAN  WAR  2? 


tlie  propriety  or  impropriety  of  the  measure 
in  other  respects  we  have  here  nothing  to  do. 

We  believe  annexation  at  that  time  to  have 
been  in  this  respect  inexpedient  and  wrong. 
It  was  certain  that  its  tendency  would  be  to 
alienate  from  us  the  good  will  of  the  Mexican 
people  and  government,  to  interrupt  the  har 
mony  which  should  exist  between  the  two  re 
publics,  and  to  arouse  illiberal  and  unfriendly 
feelings. 

The  boundary  between  Texas  and  Mexico 
was  unsettled,  and  it  was  urged  that  by  this 
act  we  should  involve  ourselves  in  a  dispute 
with  Mexico,  which  might  be  productive  of 
difficulty,  and  perhaps  of  unhappy  consequen 
ces.  Experience  has  shown  that  this  appre 
hension  was  too  well  founded.  Moreover,  Mex 
ico  had  announced  to  the  world  that  she  should 
consider  the  proposed  annexation  a  sufficient 
cause  of  war,  and  should  fight  for  the  mainten 
ance  of  her  rights.  The  probability  that  she 
would  put  her  threat  into  execution,  and  actu 
ally  undertake  a  war  so  unjust,  so  idle,  and  for 
the  support  of  which  she  was  so  entirely  desti 
tute  of  resources,  was  certainly  not  very  strong, 
but  such  an  event  was  bv  no  means  impossi 
ble. 


28  REVIEW  OF  THE 


It  would  surely  liave  been  unwise  for  the 
United  States  to  have  adopted  a  measure  from 
which  consequences  such  as  these  might  be  ap 
prehended,  without  an  adequate  reason.  Did 
any  such  reason  exist  in  this  case?  The  many 
bonds  of  sympathy  between  our  country  and 
Texas ;  the  unity  of  position,  of  people,  of  cli 
mate,  of  products,  of  interests,  together  with 
the  political  situation  of  the  rest  of  the  conti 
nent,  rendered  it  evident  that  the  question  of 
annexation  was  one  of  time  alone — that  from 
the  silent  influence  of  natural  causes  that  new 
born  republic  must  at  some  early  day  become 
a  portion  of  our  own.  u  As  respects  Texas," 
said  Mr.  Benton,  "  her  destiny  is  fixed." 

Time  has  shown  that  a  very  undue  impor 
tance  was  attached  to  the  considerations  which 
precipitated  the  adoption  of  that  measure.  It 
is  now  generally  admitted  that  the  apprehen 
sion  of  British  interference  in  any  manner 
which  should  have  influenced  our  action  on 
that  question  was  ^entirely  groundless. 

The  idea  so  much  dwelt  upon,  of  the  great 
value  of  the  country  as  a  means  of  national 
defence,  and  of  the  necessity  of  acquiring  its 
possession  instantly,  was  shown  at  the  time  to 
be  unwarranted  and  visionary,  finding  favor 


MEXICAN  WAR. 


with  the  people  by  its  boldness  and  blindness, 
but  turning  out  when  examined  by  facts  and 
figures  to  be  only  a  baseless  dream.  Though 
the  measure  cannot  be  regarded  as  unjust  to 
ward  Mexico,  still  we  must  admit  that  we  had 
no  immediate  use  for  the  country,  and  that  our 
people  permitted  vague  and  idle  apprehensions 
to  blind  them  against  the  very  serious  and  un 
happy  consequences  which  might  reasonably 
have  been  apprehended  from  its  annexation; 
that  in  an  hour  of  excitement  they  rushed, 
without  cause  and  without  reflection,  to  the 
attainment  of  an  object  whose  ultimate  posses 
sion  was  certain,  and  which  at  another  time 
might  have  been  secured  under  far  better  au 
spices. 

But,  besides  all  this,  the  act  was  wrong ;  for 
no  nation  has  the  right  knowingly  to  put  its 
own  tranquility,  and  the  harmony  of  the  world 
in  jeopardy;  to  incur  the  danger  of  a  war 
without  a  great  necessity ;  but  it  is  its  high 
duty  to  sacrifice  its  own  apparent  interest,  if 
necessary,  to  the  promotion  and  perpetuation 
of  peace. 


30  REVIEW  OF  THE 


CHAPTER    III. 


A  VIEW  of  some  of  the  leading  events  in  the  intercourse  between  the 
t.\vo  countries,  from  August,  1343,  to  October,  1845,  showing  that  the 
design  of  declaring  war  against  the  United  States  on  account  of  annex 
ation,  if  ever  seriously  entertained,  was  at  the  last  date  entirely  aban 
doned  by  Mexico.  The  advance  to  Corpus  Christi. 

WE  have  in  the  preceding  chapters  exam 
ined  the  measure  of  annexation  from  every 
point  of  view  from  which  it  can  be  considered 
.as  effecting  our  relations  with  Mexico.  We 
have  shown  it  to  have  been  the  primary  occa 
sion  of  the  late  unhappy  war.  We  have  point 
ed  out  the  influences  by  which  it  was  brought 
about.  We  have  examined  its  abstract  j  ust- 
iiess  toward  Mexico,  and  have  seen  that  it  af 
forded  to  that  republic  no  ground  of  com 
plaint.  We  have  considered  its  expediency, 
and  have  found  it  to  have  been,  although  not 
unjust,  yet  unwise  and  wrong. 

Though  the  annexation  of  Texas,  effected  at 
a  period  of  much  excitement,  and  under  the 
influences  which  we  have  described,  must  be 


MEXICAN  WAR.  31 


regarded  as  the  occasion  of  the  war,  it  was 
not  its  efficient  cause.  The  war  was  not  its 
necessary  consequence.  We  shall  see  as  we 
proceed  that,  had  the  subsequent  conduct  of 
the  United  States  been  marked  by  conciliation 
and  forbearance,  there  is  every  probability  that 
all  differences  growing  out  of  this  measure 
would  have  been  amicably  settled  by  negotia 
tion. 

The  Mexican  government  first  takes  official 
notice  of  the  project  for  annexation  in  August 
1843,  when  its  minister  of  foreign  relations, 
Mr.  Bocanegra,  writes  to  our  minister  that  "  the 
Mexican  government  has  collected  sufficient 
evidence  from  the  American  press  that  a  pro 
position  for  the  incorporation  of  the  so-called 
republic  of  Texas  is  to  be  submitted  to  con 
gress  at  its  next  session,"  and  adds  that  his  "go 
vernment  will  consider  the  passage  of  such  an 
act  as  equivalent  to  a  declaration  of  war  against 
the  Mexican  republic." 

The  next  month  the  same  functionary  writes 
again,  that  "  Mexico  will  regard  the  annexation 
of  Texas  as  a  hostile  act."  General  Almonte, 
the  Mexican  minister,  resident  at  Washington, 
announces  to  our  secretary  of  state,  in  Novem 
ber  following,  that  "  Mexico  must  consider  such 


32  REVIEW  OF  THE 


an  act  as  a  direct  aggression,  and  is  resolved 
to  delare  war  as  soon  as  it  shall  receive  infor 
mation  of  its  adoption."  Mr.  Bocanegra,  im 
mediately  after  the  treaty  of  annexation  had 
been  sent  to  the  senate,  issues  a  circular  to 
the  foreign  ministers  resident  in  Mexico,  in 
which  he  styles  the  act  "  a  declaration  of  war 
between  the  two  nations."  General  Almonte, 
a  few  days  after  the  resolution  of  congress 
consenting  to  annexation  had  been  approved 
by  the  president,  demands  his  passports  and 
returns  to  Mexico.  In  the  following  month, 
April,  1845,  Mexico  breaks  off  her  diplomatic 
relations  with  the  United  States  in  her  own 
capital,  declaring  that  the  territory  of  Texas 
belonged  to  her  by  a  right  which  she  will 
maintain  at  whatever  cost.  In  June  next,  pre 
sident  Herrera  issues  a  proclamation,  announ 
cing  that  Mexico  will  resist  by  arms  the  pro 
posed  annexation. 

This  surely  appears  warlike  enough.  It 
would  seem  as  if  the  indignation  of  Mexico 
had  indeed  been  aroused,  and  that  she  was  de 
termined  never  to  endure  the  indignity  and 
wrongs  to  which  she  fancied  herself  about  to 
be  subjected.  But  high  sounding  words  are 
very  cheap  in  Mexico,  Her  actual  forcible  op- 


MEXICAN  WAR.  33 


position  to  the  measure  was  in  strange  contrast 
with  her  threats.  We  will  go  back  in  our  nar 
rative  a  year  before  the  time  of  President  Her- 
rera's  proclamation,  when  the  warlike  farce 
began. . 

In  June,  1844,  Santa  Anna,  then  president 
of  Mexico,  issues  a  requisition  for  thirty  thou 
sand  men  and  four  millions  of  dollars  to  pros 
ecute  the  war  against  Texas.  A  large  force 
is  raised,  and  such  is  the  despatch  that  before 
the  same  month  is  passed  we  find  the  invading 
army  encamped  at  Mier,  on  the  very  border 
of  the  devoted  state.  General  Woll,  being 
instructed  by  his  government  to  wage  a  war 
of  extermination,  then  makes  a  proclamation 
denouncing  the  traitor's  doom  against  every 
person  found  beyond  the  distance  of  one  league 
from  the  Rio  Grande. 

Santa  Anna  at  the  same  time  publishes  a 
decree,  that  every  foreigner  found  on  Mexican 
soil  with  arms  in  his  hands  should  instantly  be 
put  to  death  without  quarter  or  distinction. 
But  no  action  whatever  follows  this  exhibition 
of  paper  ferocity.  Texas  remains  undisturbed, 
and  the  Mexican  army  remains  at  Mier. 

In  the  winter  following  Herrera  is  chosen  to 


34  REVIEW  OF  THE 


succeed  Santa  Anna  in  the  presidency  of  Mex 
ico.  The  new  administration  takes  no  hostile 
step.  The  army  still  remains  at  Mier. 

In  July,  1845,  more  than  a  year  after  the 
army  of  invasion  had  been  raised  by  Santa 
Anna,  General  Taylor,  under  orders  issued  by 
our  government  at  the  request  of  the  state  of 
Texas,  advances  with  his  army  to  Corpus 
Christi,  on  the  right  bank  of  the  Nueces. 

This  movement  revives  for  a  time  the  Mex 
ican  proclamation  fever.  General  Arista,  com 
manding  one  of  the  divisions  of  the  "grand 
army"  designed  for  the  invasion  of  Texas,  and 
General  Paredes,  commanding  the  army  of  re 
serve,  issue  each  a  furious  proclamation,  breath 
ing  vengeance  and  slaughter,  and  announcing 
the  determination  instantly  to  drive  the  inva 
ders  from  their  soil.  This  being  over,  all  sub 
sides  again  into  perfect  tranquility ;  the  army 
is  marched  into  distant  parts  of  the  republic, 
and  its  leaders  turn  their  minds  to  domestic 
commotion.  General  Taylor  writes  thus  from 
Corpus  Christi:  "No  extraordinary  prepara 
tions  are  going  forward  at  Matarnoros,  the  gar 
rison  does  not  seem  to  have  been  increased, 
and  our  consul  at  that  place  is  of  the  opinion 


MEXICAN  WAR.  35 


that  there  will  be  no  declaration  o  f  war.'1  "  The 
border  people  on  both  sides  of  the  river  are 
friendly."  "There  are  no  troops  of  any  con 
sequence  on  or  near  the  Rio  Grande."  Such 
is  the  unvarying  tenor  of  his  despatches,  up  to 
the  day  on  which  he  was  ordered  forward  to 
that  disputed  river. 

The  propriety  of  the  movement  of  our  ar 
my  to  Corpus  Christ!  might  on  some  accounts 
be  questioned.  But  as  the  matter  never  as 
sumed  any  practical  importance,  as  Mexico 
did  not  object  to  it  when  in  October  following 
she  requested  our  fleet  to  be  withdrawn  from 
the  Gulf  before  negotiations  should  be  opened, 
as  it  was  not  alluded  to  as  a  wrongful  act  in 
the  subsequent  correspondence  between  the 
two  governments,  and  was  soon  lost  sight  of 
behind  events  of  greater  magnitude,  we  shall 
not  dwell  further  upon  it. 


8ft  REVIEW  OF  THE 


CHAPTEE    IV. 


THE  Mission  of  Mr.  Slidell.  The  refusal  to  receive  him.  Political  sit 
uation  of  Mexico  on  the  arrival  of  our  Minister.  Her  conduct  con 
sistent.  Duty  of  the  United  States.  The  course  adopted  by  our  gov 
ernment.  Fall  of  Herrera.  The  refusal  to  send  a  commissioner  threw 
upon  our  government  the  responsibility  of  future  hostilities. 

THE  annexation  of  Texas  to  the  United  States 
had  awakened  in  Mexico  a  strong  feeling  of 
resentment.  The  administration  of  Herrera, 
however,  though  on  this  account  it  found  it 
necessary  to  continue  its  menaces,  and  keep, 
up  a  show  of  opposition,  was  evidently  dis 
posed  to  peace. 

Our  executive,  convinced  of  the  amicable 
disposition  of  the  Mexican  government,  ad 
dressed  to  it  an  inquiry  in  October,  1845,  while 
General  Taylor  was  at  Corpus  Christi,  to  as 
certain  whether  "  an  envoy  from  the  United 
States,  entrusted  with  full  powers  to  adjust 
all  the  questions  in  dispute  between  the  two 


MEXICAN  WAR.  37 


governments"  would  be  received.  The  Mexi 
can  minister  replied,  that  his  government  was 
disposed  to  receive  "  the  commissioner  of  the 
United  States  who  might  come  with  full  pow 
ers  to  settle  the  present  dispute  in  a  peaceful, 
reasonable  and  honorable  manner." 

The  promptness  and  cordiality  of  this  reply 
evince  a  sincere  desire  for  the  restoration  of 
friendship.  Immediately  on  its  receipt,  Mr. 
Slidell  was  appointed  by  the  president,  envoy 
extraordinary  and  minister  plenipotentiary  to 
reside  near  the  government  of  Mexico.  That 
government  refused  to  receive  him  in  this  ca 
pacity,  stating  that  they  had  only  consented 
to  receive  a  commissioner  for  the  settlement 
of  the  present  dispute,  and  that  they  could 
not  renew  diplomatic  intercourse,  until  the  dif 
ficulty  on  account  of  which  it  had  been  broken 
off  should  be  first  adjusted. 

It  has  been  attempted  to  charge  Mexico  with 
inconsistency  in  this  matter,  and  with  inten 
tionally  insulting  the  United  States  by  viola 
ting  her  word.  A  view  of  the  circumstances 
of  the  case  will,  we  think,  afford  to  every  can 
did  mind  a  vindication  of  her  conduct. 

The  arrival  of  Mr.  Slidell  in  that  country 


38  REVIEW  OF  THE 


occurred  at  an  unfortunate  moment.  During 
the  few  weeks  that  had  elapsed  since  the  prom 
ise  to  receive  a  commissioner,  a  sudden  storm 
had  darkened  the  political  sky  of  Mexico,  and 
the  administration  of  Herrera  was  already  ben 
ding  before  it.  Its  amicable  views  were  dis 
pleasing  to  a  majority  of  the  people,  its  tem 
porizing  policy  had  disappointed  the  army. 
Taking  advantage  of  the  discontent  of  both, 
Paredes,  having  raised  the  cry  for  the  recov 
ery  of  Texas,  wras  threatening  its  overthrow. 

Under  these  circumstances  the  arrival  of 
the  American  minister  was  a  serious  cause  of 
alarm  to  the  government.  We  have  no  rea 
son  to  doubt  its  sincere  desire  to  redeem  its 
promise.  Mr.  Slidell  himself  says,  that  he  be 
lieves  the  president  and  his  cabinet  to  be  real 
ly  desirous  to  enter  frankly  upon  a  negotiation 
which  would  terminate  all  their  difficulties 
with  the  United  States.  But  the  administra 
tion  appeared  to  be  conscious  that  his  imme 
diate  reception  would  destroy  the  last  hope 
which  they  entertained  of  withstanding  the 
popular  storm. 

In  this  state  of  anxiety  and  alarm,  the  gov 
ernment  attempted  to  defer  his  recognition 


MEXICAN  WAR.  39 


until  after  the  meeting  of  the  new  congress 
on  the  first  of  January,  in  the  hope  that  if 
they  could  hold  over  until  that  time,  they 
would  then  be  able  to  maintain  their  position. 
When  the  United  States  consul  at  Mexico  an 
nounced  to  the  government  the  arrival  of  Mr. 
Slidell  at  Vera  Cruz,  he  was  replied  to  that 
they  were  not  prepared  for  his  reception. 
When  informed  by  the  consul,  on  the  8th  of 
December,  of  his  presence  in  the  capital,  the 
minister  of  foreign  relations  expressed  his  re 
gret  that  his  arrival  had  not  been  delayed  for 
a  month,  and  in  a  conversation  marked  by 
great  frankness  and  sincerity,  represented  the 
difficulties  and  fears  of  the  administration,  and 
stated  that  nothing  positive  could  be  done  un 
til  the  meeting  of  the  new  congress.  This  in- 
tervievf  took  place  before  the  credentials  of 
Mr.  Slidell  had  been  opened,  and  up  to  this 
time  it  was  certainly  the  purpose  of  the  gov 
ernment  to  receive  him,  as  soon  as  it  could  be 
done  consistently  with  the  safety  of  the  ad 
ministration,  and  the  success  of  his  mission. 

On  the  examination  of  these  credentiais, 
however,  they  were  found  to  be  the  same  as 
those  which  had  been  presented  by  former 


40  REVIEW  OF  THE 


ministers,  having  no  reference  to  any  questions 
in  dispute,  as  if  the  friendly  intercourse  be 
tween  the  two  countries  had  never  been  inter 
rupted.  The  question  of  receiving  a  resident 
minister  from  the  United  States  was  immedi 
ately  laid  before  the  council  of  government, 
and  in  accordance  with  its  advice,  on  the  21st 
of  December,  the  government  communicated 
to  Mr.  Slidell  its  refusal  to  receive  him  in  that 
capacity ;  stating  that  they  had  only  consent 
ed  to  receive  a  commissioner  to  settle  the  pres 
ent  dispute,  and  that  to  this  object  solely  they 
expected  the  mission  would  have  been  direct 
ed.  The  minister  of  foreign  relations  at  the 
same  time  stated  that  the  sentiments  in  which 
a  willingness  to  receive  a  commissioner  wrere 
first  expressed  still  remained  unchanged,  and 
that  his  government  would  still  be  happy  to 
open  negotiations  for  the  peaceful  settlement 
of  the  existing  difficulty. 

Here  was  a  change  of  purpose  instant  upon 
the  examination  of  the  credentials  of  the  min 
ister.  There  was  no  hesitation,  no  objection  on 
any  other  ground,  but  a  determination  that 
he  could  not  be  received,  for  the  sole  and  dis 
tinct  reason  that  he  did  not  come  in  the  char- 


MEXICAN  WAR. 


acter  in  which  they  had  expected  him  to  come, 
and  in  which  alone  they  had  promised  and 
were  willing  to  receive  him. 

The  probabilities  of  the  case  afford  also  a 
strong  presumption  that  the  conduct  of  Mex 
ico  was  entirely  consistent.  No  one  under 
standing  the  Mexican  character,  had  he  been 
asked  at  the  time  if  that  government  would 
receive  a  minister  from  the  United  States, 
thereby  abandoning  openly  the  position  which 
it  had  taken  a  few  months  before,  and  con 
fessing  that  its  complaints  w^ere  groundless, 
and  that  its  conduct  had  been  ridiculous,  would 
have  hesitated  to  answer  no.  Our  government 
itself  must  have  been  surprised  at  the  readi 
ness  with  which  they  imagined  Mexico  to  have 
yielded  her  high  pretensions,  and  to  have  for 
gotten  her  ancient  pride.  Had  this  been  the 
case,  there  would  have  been  in  it  an  inconsist 
ency  indeed. 

Now  the  language  used  by  that  government 
is  incapable  of  any  other  fair  construction 
than  the  one  which  it  was  intended  to  bear. 
The  term  "  commissioner"  is  never  applied  to 
a  resident  minister.  The  answer  evidently 
contemplated  that  the  mission  would  be  con- 


42  REVIEW  OF  THE 


fined  to  a  single  object ;  the  powers  of  resi 
dent  ministers  are  always  general.  It  would 
seem,  that  without  the  use  of  a  negative,  lan 
guage  could  not  more  distinctly  express  the 
meaning  for  which  Mexico  contended. 

The  parties  fell  into  a  mutual  mistake.  Mex 
ico  understood  "  all  the  questions  in  dispute" 
to  arise  from  the  annexation.  This  difficulty 
engrossed  her  whole  attention,  and  it  never 
occurred  to  her  that  there  was  any  other ;  as 
indeed  there  was  no  other  unadjusted  question 
which  a  minister  was  competent  to  settle.  She 
naturally  supposed  that  it  was  the  desire  of 
the  United  States  to  restore  friendly  inter 
course  in  the  manner  universal  among  nations. 
This  government  on  the  other  hand  seemed  to 
imagine  that  Mexico  only  desired  that  the  min 
ister  who  might  come  to  reside  at  her  capital 
should  possess  full  powers  to  settle  the  present 
dispute.  The  known  disposition  and  previous 
conduct  of  Mexico  certainly  furnished  a  pre 
sumption  that  she  would  consent  to  no  such 
concession.  How  our  government  could  gath 
er  anything  from  her  reply  to  rebut  this  pre 
sumption  we  cannot  understand;  we  will  as 
sume,  however,  that  it  really  expected  the  min- 


MEXICAN  WAR.  43 


ister  would  be  received,  because  to  suppose 
the  contrary  would  be  to  suppose  it  to  have 
acted  in  bad  faith. 

But  this  mutual  error  was  soon  to  be  ex 
plained.  Mexico  found  that  the  United  States 
had  sent  a  minister  to  her  capital,  expecting 
that  he  would  be  received,  and  the  latter  dis 
covered  that  Mexico  had  intended  no  such 
submission  whatever.  What  was  then  the  du 
ty  of  the  United  States  ?  A  grave  question 
was  presented  to  our  government ;  the  mighty 
results  of  peace  or  war  might  hang  on  its  de 
cision.  We  think  that  the  United  States 
should  have  sent  a  commissioner,  as  Mexico 
desired.  We  rest  this  opinion  on  two  grounds. 
It  would  have  been  a  just  and  conciliating  po 
licy,  and  it  would  in  all  probability  have  se 
cured  a  peace. 

In  the  annexation  of  Texas,  we  had  been 
the  gainers  at  the  expense  of  Mexico.  How 
ever  acquired,  the  fact  was  that  we  came  to 
possess  a  vast  territory  which  once  belonged 
to  her.  Her  pride  was  wounded,  and  her  jeal 
ousy  was  aroused.  Her  government  saw  that 
it  was  useless  to  contend  against  the  act,  and 
its  only  object  was  to  yield  its  high  preten- 


44  REVIEW  OF  THE 


sions  in  such  a  manner  as  to  preserve  its  self- 
respect,  and  to  calm  the  clamor  of  the  people. 

Now  under  these  circumstances  it  would 
surely  have  been  wise  and  just  in  the  United 
States  to  have  exercised  toward  that  republic 
a  spirit  of  kindness  and  generosity,  to  have 
borne  with  her  pride,  and  to  have  taken  some 
pains  to  soothe  her  irritation  and  to  dispel  her 
jealousy.  The  existing  boundary  question  af 
forded  an  opportunity  for  that  conciliating 
course  which  justice  required  from  us,  and 
which  would  gratify  the  feelings  of  Mexico. 

Had  that  been  adjusted  by  a  commissioner, 
had  a  comparatively  small  sum  been  paid  to 
Mexico  for  that  undetermined  extent  of  territo 
ry  which  she  might  be  supposed  to  surrender 
and  had  she  been  treated  with  the  forbearance 
due  from  a  great  nation  toward  a  feebler  one 
on  which  it  was  encroaching,  how  easily  might 
the  causes  of  difficulty  have  been  dissipated, 
and  all  resentments  brushed  away. 

Our  government  indeed  could  hardly  have 
adopted  a  course  better  calculated  than  the  one 
which  it  did  adopt,  to  deepen  in  the  minds  of  the 
Mexican  people  its  sense  of  injury,  and  its  feel 
ing  of  hostility.  Mexico  was  first  charged 


MEXICAN  WAR  45 


with  having  violated  her  word,  and  she  was 
next  informed  that  the  alternative  was  be 
fore  her,  immediately  to  abandon  her  position 
and  renew  her  diplomatic  intercourse  with 
the  United  States,  or  to  suffer  the  consequen 
ces.  Now  consenting  to  the  demand  of  Mexi 
co  would  have  been  so  perfectly  in  accordance 
with  the  usages  of  nations,  it  was  so  peculiarly 
proper  for  us  to  adopt  a  conciliatory  course 
toward  her  at  that  time,  and  the  unhappy 
consequences  of  this  haughty  and  imperious 
conduct  were  so  apparent,  that  we  are  driven 
to  the  conclusion  that  a  sincere  desire  for  peace 
and  a  renewal  of  friendship,  and  an  anxiety  to 
show  to  Mexico  that  we  intended  her  no  inju 
ry,  were  not  in  the  mind  of  our  government ; 
but  that  it  was  impelled  rather  by  that  pride 
of  power  which  generally  accompanies  wrong, 
and  which  can  tolerate  nothing  but  submis 
sion. 

In  a  few  days  after  the  refusal  to  receive  our 
minister,  the  administration  of  Herrera,  who 
only  a  year  before  had  been  elected  with  une 
qualled  unanimity,  yielded  to  the  opposition 
which  had  been  excited  against  it,  and  by  the 
act  of  the  army  the  supreme  power  passed 


46  REVIEW  OF  THE 


without  bloodshed  or  tumult  into  the  hands 
of  Paredes. 

In  the  latter  part  of  January  Mr.  Slidell  was 
directed  to  apply  to  the  new  government  for 
reception.  As  it  might  have  been  expected, 
Paredes  declined  receiving  him  on  the  same 
ground  on  which  his  predecessor  had  based  his 
refusal. 

There  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt  that  the 
administration  of  Herrera,  and  probably  that 
of  Paredes  also,  would  have  received  a  com 
missioner  to  settle  the  dispute  relating  to  Tex 
as.  Had  a  commissioner  been  sent  and  receiv 
ed,  it  is  probable  that  peace  and  harmony 
would  have  been  established.  Now  we  sub 
mit,  that  if  it  appears  probable  that  the  war 
would  have  been  prevented  by  any  just  and 
proper  act  on  the  part  of  the  United  States 
which  that  government  refused  to  perform,  it 
must  share  at  least  the  responsibility  of  the 
war,  by  whichever  party  it  might  actually  have 
been  commenced. 

We  shall  not  examine  the  question^  whether 
the  administration  of  Paredes,  the  attempt  at 
negotiation  having  been  thus  broken  off,  would 
have  proceeded  to  acts  of  hostility  against  the 


MEXICAN  WAR.  47 


United  States  on  account  of  the  annexation  of 
Texas.  Tliis  at  best  would  be  only  an  exam 
ination  of  probabilities,  which  could  not  lead 
to  a  satisfactory  conclusion,  nor  be  of  any  prac 
tical  consequence.  Our  own  opinion  is,  that 
it  would  not.  We  entertain  but  little  doubt 
that,  as  the  popular  commotion  was  taken  ad 
vantage  of  by  Paredes  for  his  own  personal 
elevation,  so  he  would  have  been  glad  to  avoid 
a  collision  with  the  United  States,  which  would 
endanger  its  security.  Many  hold  a  contrary 
opinion.  As  Mexico  was  allowed  no  opportu 
nity  to  solve  this  doubt,  the  question  must  re 
main  as  uncertain  as  it  is  immaterial. 


48  REVIEW  OF  THE 


CHAPTEE    V. 


THE  advance  of  our  Army  to  the  Rio  Grande.  This  movement  a  viola 
tion  of  the  rights  of  Mexico,  which  had  been  recognized  by  our  Gov 
ernment  itself. 


have  now  established  the  fact,  that  war 
was  not  the  necessary  consequence  of  annexa 
tion.  We  have  seen  that  beyond  a  reasonable 
doubt,  notwithstanding  the  braggadocio  and 
haughty  language  of  Mexico,  all  matters  of 
dispute  and  difficulty  between  that  country 
and  our  own  might  have  been  settled  by  nego 
tiation,  had  the  United  States  really  desired  to 
preserve  harmony  and  peace. 

We  now  pass  to  the  consideration  of  an  event 
on  which,  and  on  which  alone,  the  responsibil 
ity  of  the  Mexican  w^ar  must  forever  rest.  By 
refusing  to  negotiate  in  the  manner  that  Mex 
ico  desired,  we  had  estopped  ourselves  from 
ever  asserting  that  such  a  Negotiation  would 
have  been  unsuccessful.  We  could  not  con- 


MEXICAN  WAR.  49 


tend  that  it  was  impossible  for  a  treaty  to  have 
been  made,  for  we  had  refused  to  treat.  As 
against  us,  the  presumption  is  warranted  that 
peace  could  have  been  preserved  by  honora 
ble  negotiation.  And  now,  by  the  act  which 
we  are  about  to  examine,  we  in  like  manner 
deprived  ourselves  of  any  right  to  assert,  that 
even  after  negotiations  were  broken  off,  war 
might  have  been  commenced  by  Mexico. 

On  the  13th  of  January,  1846,  General 
Taylor  was  ordered  to  "advance  from  Corpus 
Christi  as  early  as  the  season  would  permit, 
and  occupy  a  position  on  or  near  the  Eio 
Grande."  We  shall  devote  a  considerable 
space  to  the  examination  of  this  act  of  our 
government,  because  it  was  the  most  impor 
tant  event  in  the  history  of  the  war,  and  no 
one  can  be  competent  to  form  any  opinion  con 
cerning  the  causes  of  that  unhappy  contest, 
without  fully  understanding  it. 

Burke,  in  his  reflections  on  the  French  rev 
olution,  says :  "We  have  consecrated  the  state, 
that  no  man  should  approach  to  look  into  its 
defects  but  with  clue  caution ;  that  he  should 
approach  to  the  faults  of  the  state  as  to  the 
wounds  of  a  father,  with  pious,  awe  and  tremb- 
2* 


50  REVIEW  OF  THE 


ling  solicitude."  This  caution  we  have  endeav 
ored  to  exercise,  and  such  awe  and  solicitude 
we  trust  our  patriotism  inspires ;  but  we  are 
unable  to  resist  the  conviction  that  this  ad 
vance  was  an  intentional  and  deliberate  act  of 
war  on  the  part  of  our  government. 

By  a  law  passed  immediately  after  her  inde 
pendence,  Texas  declared  her  western  bound 
ary  to  be  the  Rio  Grande,  from  its  mouth  to 
its  source.  Mexico,  on  the  contrary,  claimed 
that  portions  of  New-Mexico,  Chihuahua,  Coa- 
huila  and  Tamaulipas,  departments  of  her  own 
territory,  lay  east  of  this  pretended  boundary, 
and  formed  no  part  of  the  state  of  Texas. 

Our  government  on  several  occasions  recog 
nized  this  claim  of  Mexico  as  entitled  to  its 
respect.  Our  secretary  of  state  in  1844,  in 
stating  to  Mexico  the  policy  of  this  country, 
says,  that  uthe  president  desires  to  settle  the 
question  of  boundary  on  the  most  liberal  and 
satisfactory  terms."  When,  nearly  a  year  after, 
congress  consented  to  the  annexation,  they  did 
so  on  the  express  condition  that  the  territory 
should  be  "subject  to  the  adjustment  by  this 
government  of  all  questions  of  boundary  that 
may  arise  with  other  governments." 


MEXICAN  WAR.  51 


But  after  all  this,  and  while  the  question 
stood  in  precisely  the  same  situation,  our  ex 
ecutive  assumes  the  claim  of  Mexico  to  be 
unfounded,  sends  its  army  to  the  utmost  limit 
of  its  pretensions,  where  it  blockades  the  har 
bor  of  Point  Isabel,  and  the  mouth  of  the 
Rio  Grande,  and  plants  its  cannon,  "within 
good  range  for  demolishing"  the  peaceful  town 
of  Matamoros ;  and  writes  to  General  Taylor 
that  the  attempt-  by  Mexico  to  cross  the  Rio 
Grande  with  a  considerable  force  would  be  re 
garded  as  an  invasion  of  the  United  States 
and  the  commencement  of  hostilities. 

On  the  mere  statement  of  these  facts  the 
United  States  must  stand  convicted  of  the  un 
just  act  of  treating  with  violent  disregard  a 
claim,  which  they  had  acknowledged  it  their 
duty  to  respect,  and  which  was  made  by  a  na 
tion  with  whom  they  were  at  peace,  and  whom 
it  was,  under  the  circumstances,  peculiarly  their 
duty  to  conciliate. 


52  REVIEW  OF  THE 


CHAPTEE    VI. 


THE  advance  to  tho  Rio  Grande  an  invasion  of  the  territory  of  Mexico. 
LouUia.ia  as  ceded  to  IH  by  France  in  1303  extended  no  farther  west 
than  to  the  Nueces.  This  river  the  western  boundary  of  the  Spanish 
province  of  Tcx-is  prior  to  1^20.  The  same  river 'the  boundary  of 
the  Mexican  State  of  Texan.  Texas  after  ht-r  independence  nevi-r  in 
any  Ic'gal  manner  enlarged  her  territory.  The  strip  of  country  in  ques 
tion  in  the  exclusive  possession  ot  Mexico  in  1H46.  Government 
aware  at  th«  time  the  order  for  the  advance  was  issued  that  it  would 
be  au  invasion. 

THE  advance  of  onr  army  was  not  only  a 
disregard  of  an  unadjusted  claim  which  it  was 
our  duty  to  respect,  it  was  an  invasion  of  the 
territory  of  Mexico.  The  claim  of  Mexico  to 
the  left  bank  of  the  Rio  Grande  was  well  found 
ed,  and  there  existed  not  a  shadow  of  title  on 
which  Texa3  could  rest  her  pretension  to  it. 
It  formed  no  part  of  the  state  of  Texas,  but 
was  and  always  had  been  in  the  peaceable  pos 
session  of  Mexico,  and  under  the  jurisdiction 
of  hor  laws. 

It  has  beea  contended  that  the  boundary 


MEXICAN  WAR.  53 


which  separated  ancient  Louisiana  from  New- 
Mexico  and  New  Spain,  formed  the  true  west 
ern  limit  of  Texas.  The  latter  provinces  were 
the  original  possessions  of  Spain.  Louisiana 
was  a  province  of  France.  In  1803  France 
ceded  the  province  of  Louisiana  to  the  United 
States.  It  became  important  afterward  to  set 
tle  the  boundary  between  the  territory  thus 
ceded  and  the  Spanish  possessions.  By  the 
treaty  of  1819,  the  Sabine  river  was  deter 
mined  to  be  that  boundary.  The  United  States 
had  derived  from  France  an  undefined  claim 
to  territory  west  of  that  river,  but  it  was  sur 
rendered  to  Spain  as  a  part  of  the  considera 
tion  for  the  cession  of  Florida. 

It  was  now  contended  that  by  this  treaty  of 
1819  the  United  States  had  surrendered  to 
Spain  the  entire  territory  from  the  Sabine  to 
the  Eio  Grande,  to  all  which  she  had  received 
an  unquestionable  title  from  France,  and  that 
Texas  embraced  the  identical  and  entire  coun 
try  thus  surrendered ;  and  consequently  that, 
Texas  being  annexed,  Mexico  had  no  shadow 
of  reason  for  disputing  our  authority  quite  to 
the  Rio  Grande. 

Now  we  could  derive  from  France  no  title 


54  REVIEW  OF  THE 


to  territory  which  France  did  not  herself  pos 
sess.  Before  we  proceed  further  we  will  show 
by  historical  testimony  that  France  possessed 
no  title  at  any  time  to  the  region  west  of  the 
Nueces. 

Discovery  vests  in  a  nation  the  title  to  un 
inhabited  territory.  Title  thus  acquired  is 
however  imperfect,  and  may  be  lost,  unless 
within  a  reasonable  time  it  is  followed  by  oc 
cupation,  or  at  least  by  an  attempt  at  occupa 
tion.  For  it  would  be  unjust  and  discouraging 
to  enterprise  if  a  nation,  having  discovered  a 
new  country  which  through  feebleness  or  other 
cause  it  is  unable  to  occupy,  should  have  a 
right  to  forbid  its  settlement.  Accordingly  if 
any  newly  discovered  country  remains  for  many 
years  unoccupied,  the  title  may  pass  from  the 
discoverers,  and  vest  in  a  nation  which  shall 
have  settled  the  country,  cultivated  the  soil, 
and  opened  a  new  home  for  mankind. 

Louisiana  itself  may  be  cited  as  an  illustra 
tion  of  this  law.  In  1583,  Hernando  de  Soto, 
a  Spanish  cavalier,  searching  through  the  track 
less  forests  of  the  south  for  golden  mines  and 
the  fountain  of  perpetual  youth,  first  discov 
ered  the  Mississippi  near  the  mouth  of  the  Ar- 


MEXICAN  WAR.  55 


kansas ;  and  a  part  of  his  adventurous  band, 
after  his  death,  descended  that  river  to  the 
gulf,  and  penetrated  to  the  waters  of  Mexico. 
In  that  age  of  romantic  visions,  Spanish  ad 
venturers  cared  not  to  seek  the  valley  so  full 
of  disaster  to  its  discoverer,  nor  the  river  be 
neath  whose  waters  he  found  his  grave ;  and 
France,  by  her  settlement  one  hundred  years 
afterward,  acquired  a  title  to  Louisiana  which 
Spain  could  not  successfully  dispute. 

By  these  principles  let  us  examine  the  case 
before  us.  France  contended  that  the  Rio 
Grande  formed  the  western  boundary  of  her 
possessions,  while  Spain  as  strenuously  insisted 
that  her  sovereignty  extended  east  to  the  Sa- 
bine.  Historical  evidence  seems  to  point  out 
the  proper  boundary  between  the  French  and 
Spanish  provinces  to  have  been  the  range  of 
mountains  which  forms  the  southern  part  of 
the  great  Rocky  mountain  chain,  in  which  the 
Red,  Arkansas  and  Colorado  rivers  have  their 
rise  and  which  forms  the  western  wall  of  the 
Mississippi  valley,  together  with  the  desert 
prairies  east  of  the  Nueces,  and  extending  about 
two  hundred  miles  from  the  termination  of  this 
range  to  the  Gulf. 


56  REVIEW  OF  THE 


The  claim  of  France  rested  chiefly  on  the 
expeditions  of  La  Salle,  the  grant  of  Louis 
XIV.  to  Crozat,  the  map  of  De  Lisle,  and  a 
few  other  maps  and  descriptions  derived  from 
these.  They  were  all  extremely  indefinite,  and 
nearly  as  inaccurate  as  were  descriptions  of  Cen 
tral  Africa,  before  the  explorations  of  Park, 
Denham,  Clapperton,  Caille  and  the  Landers. 
Thus  the  map  of  De  Lisle  included  in  Louisi 
ana  all  the  country  between  New- York  and 
Pennsylvania  on  the  east,  and  the  Rocky  moun 
tains  on  the  west.  The  grant  to  Crozat  cov 
ered  this  vast  extent.  It  was  about  as  valid, 
though  not  quite  so  extensive  in  its  sweep  as 
the  bull  by  which  Pope  Alexander  VI.  grant 
ed  to  Spain  all  the  heathen  countries  which 
she  might  discover  west  of  the  Azores,  and  to 
Portugal  all  Asia,  Africa  and  the  East  Indies. 

In  the  year  1682,  La  Salle  descended  the 
Mississippi  from  the  Illinois  river  to  its  mouth. 
He  claimed  for  France  all  the  unknown  region 
whose  waters  flow  in  that  river  to  the  ocean, 
and  named  it  Louisiana  after  his  sovereign. 
Three  years  after,  at  his  solicitation,  the  French 
government  equipped  four  vessels  to  seek  the 
mouth  of  the  Mississippi  by  sea,  and  he  set  out 


MEXICAN  WAR.  57 


upon  a  new  expedition,  to  establish  a  great 
colony  on  the  fertile  shores  watered  by  that 
river.  Sailing,  through  ignorance  of  the  coast, 
one  hundred  leagues  westward  of  his  destina 
tion,  he  was  finally  landed  in  the  bay  of  Me- 
tagorda,  and  saw  the  ships  sail  away,  leaving 
him  with  less  than  a  hundred  companions  in 
that  unknown  land.  The  colony  melted  rap 
idly  away  by  disease  and  dissension,  and  he 
himself,  within  a  few  months,  leaving  the  arms 
of  France  in  the  forests  of  Texas,  met  death 
through  private  treachery  in  the  land  which 
he  had  discovered  for  his  king.  The  settle 
ment  was  then  abandoned,  and  seven  men  who 
alone  escaped  its  numerous  disasters,  wandered 
eastward  to  the  Mississippi,  and  returned  to 
Canada.  "These  distresses,"  says  the  Abbe 
Eaynal,  "  so©n  made  France  lose  sight  of  a  re 
gion,  that  was  then  but  little  known." 

In  1722,  Bernard  de  la  Harpe  attempted  to 
plant  a  French  colony  on  nearly  the  same  spot, 
which  enterprize,  as  Bancroft  informs  us,  "  had 
no  other  result  than  to  incense  the  natives 
against  the  French,  and  to  stimulate  the  Span 
iards  to  the  occupation  of  the  country  by  a 
fort," 


58  REVIEW  OF  THE 


These  were  the  only  efforts  ever  made  "by 
France  to  colonize  Texas.  "  She  was  too  feeble 
ever  after,"  we  are  told,  "  to  attempt  extend 
ing  her  settlements  west  of  the  Sabine."  The 
act  of  taking  possession  of  the  Mississippi  can 
not  be  considered  as  giving  to  France  a  title  to 
territory  lying  beyond  a  chain  of  mountains, 
in  which  were  its  most  distant  sources. 

Spain  made  her  first  settlement  east  of  the 
Rio  Grande  in  New  Mexico,  about  the  year 
1594,  eighty  years  before  a  French  subject 
ever  saw  the  Mississippi,  and  held  it  in  undis 
puted  possession  until  the  Mexican  revolution. 
All  geographers  have  laid  down  the  mountains 
which  divide  the  valley  of  the  Mississippi  from 
that  of  the  Rio  Grande  as  the  eastern  bounda 
ry  of  the  Spanish  province  of  New  Mexico. 
Above  the  Passo  del  Norte,  then,  discovery 
and  unmolested  occupancy  had  given  Spain  a 
title  to  the  region  west  of  these  mountains, 
which  no  nation  ever  seriously  questioned. 

South  of  this  point,  the  country  east  of  the 
Rio  Grande  remained,  until  within  a  few  years, 
almost  an  unbroken  wilderness,,  where  the 
forest  dropped  its  fruit  with  its  leaves  to  the 
ground,  the  undisturbed  soil  was  black  with 


MEXICAN  WAR.  59 


the  mould  of  ages,  and  the  Indian  from  the 
mountain  roamed  as  wild  as  his  fathers. 

The  Spaniards  first  crossed  the  lower  Rio 
Grande  in  1690,  five  years  after  La  Salle's  un 
happy  expedition.  They  discovered  and  took 
possession  of  the  country  to  the  Nueces,  which 
no  French  adventurer  is  related  to  have  seen, 
and  into  which,  before  the  Mexican  revolution, 
no  adverse  settler  ever  wandered.  Having 
frustrated  La  Harpe's  attempt  in  1722,  they 
continued,  until  the  territory  came  into  their 
undisputed  possession  by  the  treaty  of  1819, 
the  only  rivals  with  the  Indians  for  the  sove 
reignty  of  the  region  quite  to  the  Sabine< 
Bexar  was  founded  by  them  in  1692.  They 
formed  a  settlement  at  Nacogdoches,  on  the 
frontier  of  their  claim,  in  the  early  part  of  the 
last  century.  Goliad  dates  its  origin  in  1716. 

The  Abbe  Raynal,  the  highest  French  au 
thority  of  the  reign  of  Louis  XVI.,  describes 
the  country  as  a  part  of  New  Spain,  and  de 
signates  all  the  towns  and  rivers  by  Spanish 
names,  except  the  bay  of  Metagorda,  where 
La  Salle  landed.  He  says  that  the  French 
formed  no  settlements  upon  the  coast,  west  of 
the  Mississippi. 


60  REVIEW  OF  THE 


The  claim  of  Spain  to  the  Sahine  was  then 
far  from  being  groundless  ;  that  of  France  to 
the  Rio  Grande  was  entirely  without  founda 
tion.  There  are  two  reasons,  however,  why 
the  mountain  and  desert  boundary  should  be 
considered,  not  in  opposition  to  the  rightful 
claims  of  France,  but  rather  to  those  of  Spain, 
as  the  proper  line  of  separation  between  their 
possessions.  The  discovery  of  Texas  was  by 
the  French,  and  they  made  two  attempts  to 
settle  the  country,  one  the  earliest  on  record, 
which  Jefferson  forcibly  terms  "  the  cradle  of 
Louisiana,"  and  which,  as  Bancroft  declares, 
"  made  the  country  still  more  surely  a  part  of 
her  territory,  because  the  colony  found  there 
its  grave." 

This  is  also  the  most  prominent  natural 
boundary  which  the  country  presents.  Rivers 
in  all  new  countries  are  undesirable  dividing 
lines,  as  settlements  are  often  formed  by  the 
same  parties  on  both  banks  indiscriminately. 
Of  this  the  Nueces  and  Rio  Grande  are  them 
selves  examples.  But  the  mountain  and  the 
barren  plain  are  great  natural  obstacles,  and 
broad  and  appropriate  objects  of  separation. 

Mr.  Adams,  speaking  not  as  the  advocate, 


MEXICAN  WAR. 


but  as  the  historian,  says  of  the  claim  of 
France  :  "  It  was  no  right.  It  was  a  claim  of 
all  the  territory  to  the  Rio  Grande,  when  in 
fact  there  never  had  been  an  adjustment  of 
that  claim  with  another,  and  much  better  au 
thenticated  claim  of  Spain."  He  stated  that 
President  Monroe,  during  whose  administra 
tion  the  subject  was  most  discussed,  had  no 
confidence  in  the  claim  to  the  Rio  Grande. 
Mr.  Benton,  in  his  eloquent  language  says: 
"  The  magnificent  valley  of  the  Mississippi  is 
ours,  with  all  its  fountains,  springs  and  floods." 
And  again :  "  The  Rio  del  Norte  is  a  Mexican 
river  by  position  and  possession."  Now  in  view 
of  historical  testimony  so  unanswerable  and 
authority  so  high  as  this,  of  what  consequence 
is  it,  that  the  French  officer  who  surrendered 
Louisiana  to  the  United  States  in  1803,  in 
formed  the  agents  of  our  government  that  that 
province  extended  to  the  Rio  Grande,  or  that 
Mr.  Jefferson  and  other  eminent  men  at  the 
same  time  declared,  even  in  the  strongest 
terms,  their  conviction  that  our  newly  acquir 
ed  territory  was  bounded  by  that  river  ?  Of 
what  consequence  is  it,  that  Mr.  Clay,  attack 
ing  in  the  house  of  representatives  the  treaty  of 


62  REVIEW  OF  THE 


1819,  declared  the  country  to  the  Rio  Grande 
to  have  been  thrown  away  by  that  instrument, 
or  that  the  executive  who  declared  our  title 
to  fifty-four  degrees  forty  minutes  in  Oregon 
to  be  clear  and  unquestionable,  contended  for 
the/same  extreme  boundary?  How  can  the 
claims  put  forth  by  Mr.  Adams  in  his  corres 
pondence  with  the  Spanish  minister  in  1819, 
when  it  was,  as  he  declares,  his  duty  to  make 
the  best  case  that  he  could  for  his  own  coun 
try,  be  opposed  for  a  moment  to  his  subse 
quent  and  opposite  declaration  which  we  have 
quoted  ?  The  claim  of  Texas  to  the  left  bank 
of  that  river,  then,  so  far  as  it  has  been  found 
ed  on  the  title  of  France,  falls  to  the  ground. 
It  follows  also  that  the  president  is  mistaken, 
when,  in  his  message  of  December,  1846,  he 
says,  that  "  the  country  which  was  ceded  to 
Spain  by  the  treaty  of  1819,  embraced  all  the 
country  now  claimed  by  the  state  of  Texas, 
between  the  Nueces  and  the  Rio  Grande."  It 
clearly  embraced  no  part  of  this  territory 
whatever. 

We  shall  now  proceed  to  show  that  before 
the  Mexican  revolution  the  Nueces  was  the 
farthest  western  boundary  that  was  ever  as- 


MEXICAN  WAR. 


signed  to  the  Spanish  province  of  Texas  ;  for 
Spain  erected  the  country  from  the  Nueces  to 
the  Sabine  into  a  province  under  this  name  in 
the  latter  part  of  the  seventeenth  century,  and 
as  it  will  be  remembered,  always  maintained 
its  exclusive  possession,  as  well  before  as  after 
the  Sabine  became  her  established  boundary 
by  the  treaty  of  1819. 

Pinkerton  wrote  in  1802,  and  is  the  first 
English  geographer  of  his  time.  His  atlas 
marks  the  limits  of  Texas  very  distinctly. 
Its  western  boundary  follows  up  the  Nueces  a 
short  distance,  until  that  river  inclines  to  the 
west,  and  then  leaving  it  strikes  further  east, 
crossing  the  San  Antonio  and  Colorado. 

Humboldt,  the  prince  of  geographers  and 
travelers,  spent  several  years  in  exploring 
Spanish  America.  He  prepared  in  the  royal 
school  of  Mines  in  Mexico,  a  map  of  that 
country,  compiled  from  the  best  authorities  in 
Europe  and  America,  corrected  from  his  own 
personal  observation.  In  this  map,  published 
in  Paris  in  1808,  theNueces  is  described  to  be 
the  western  boundary  of  the  province  of  Tex 
as.  Harrison,  Black,  Le  Sage  and  Malte  Brun, 
the  most  standard  geographers  since  the  day 


64  REVIEW  OF  THE 


of  Humboldt,  agree  in  giving  the  same  west 
ern  boundary  to  Texas. 

Lieutenant  Pike  was  sent  out  by  President 
Jefferson  in  1806-'07,  to  explore  the  head  wa 
ters  of  the  Arkansas.  On  his  return,  he  was 
conducted  by  the  Spanish  authorities  through 
New  Mexico,  Chihuahua  and  Texas.  The  map 
attached  to  his  journal  of  his  expedition  is  re 
garded  as  the  best  American  authority  of  that 
day.  On  this  map  the  western  boundary  of 
Texas  is  distinctly  marked,  somewhat  east  of 
the  Nueces.  All  the  maps  of  that  period  rep 
resent  the  intendencies  of  JSFuevo  San  Tander 
and  Coahuila  extending  eastward  to  tho  IsTue- 
ces,  and  Texas  embracing  all  the  region  be 
tween  that  river,  or  the  dssert  east  of  it,  and 
the  Sabine. 

And  now,  finally,  the  Nueces  was  the  western 
boundary  of  the  state  of  Texas  under  the  Mexi 
can  constitution  of  1824.  Senator  Niles,  in  his 
work  on  that  country,  says :  "  The  river  Nueeea 
has  heretofore  been  considered  as  the  western 
boundary  of  Texas,  tha  district  between  this 
and  the  Rio  Grande  having  been  included 
in  the  state  of  Taniaulipas,  while  the  farce  of  a 
federal  republic  was  played  off  in  Mexico." 


MEXICAN  WAR.  55 


General  Almonte  was  appointed  in  1834  a 
commissioner  of  the  Mexican  government  to 
settle  the  boundary  between  Texas  and  Coa- 
huila,  pending  the  application  of  the  latter  to 
be  admitted  as  a  separate  state.  In  his  official 
report  he  states,  that  the  commonly  received 
opinion  that  Texas  extends  to  the  ^ueces  was 
found  to  be  an  error ;  that  the  true  line  com 
menced  at  the  mouth  of  the  Aransas,  the  first 
stream,  east  of  the  Nueces,  and  followed  it  to 
its  source.  The  legislature  of  Coahuila  and 
Texas,  in  their  legislative  acts,  subsequently 
adopted  the  same  boundary. 

In  the  summer  of  1836,  President  Jackson 
sent  Henry  M.  Morfit  to  Texas  to  inquire  into 
the  political  condition  of  that  country,  with 
reference  to  the  acknowledgment  of  its  inde 
pendence,  perhaps  also  remotely  with  a  view 
to  its  annexation.  JEis  official  letters  were 
communicated  by  the  president  to  congress. 
In  one  of  these  he  says :  "  The  political  lim 
its  of  Texas,  previous  to  the  last  revolution, 
were  the  JSTueces  on  the  west,"  <fec. 

The  original  edition  of  Tanner's  map  of 
Texas,  compiled  by  Stephen  F.  Austin,  the 
first  and  most  prominent  of  the  settlers  of  that 
3 


56  REVIEW  OF  THE 


state,  gives  the  Nueces  as  its  western  bounda 
ry  ;  though  in  the  editions  issued  since  1836, 
the  colored  line  has  been  removed  to  the  Rio 
Grande,  the  engraved  line,  however,  remaining 
on  the  Nueces. 

From  the  mass  of  evidence  before  us,  we 
have  presented  that  of  the  highest  and  most 
conclusive  authority,  to  show  the  historical 
fact,  which  no  one  understanding  the  subject 
now  denies,  that  before  the  revolution  of  1834 
-'35,  Texas  as  a  Spanish  province  or  as  a 
Mexican  state  had  and  claimed  no  title  to  the 
country  between  the  Nueces  and  the  Rio 
Grande. 

But  it  is  said,  this  does  not  settle  the  ques 
tion.  The  republic  of  Texas  held  her  territory 
by  a  better  title  than  musty  maps  or  royal 
records  can  bestow.  The  country  which  she 
claims  was  hers  by  a  declaration  of  independ 
ence,  and  a  successful  resistance  against  usur 
pation,  was  held  by  her  arms,  and  conse 
crated  by  her  blood.  Let  us  see. 

The  mouth  of  the  Nueces  is  distant  about 
one  hundred  and  forty  miles  in  a  direct  line 
from  that  of  the  Rio  Grande ;  but  two  hun 
dred  and  fifty  miles  up  the  latter  river,  the  dis- 


MEXICAN  WAB. 


tance  between  the  two  is  only  about  sixty 
miles.  Of  this  country,  a  narrow  strip  bor 
dering  the  Rio  Grande,  and  another  still  less  in 
width  skirting  the  Nueces  are  alone  habitable. 
Between  these  lies  a  solitary  highland  desert 
about  one  hundred  and  ten  miles  in  width  at 
its  southern  extremity,  and  containing  salt 
lakes  of  considerable  size. 

At  the  time  of  the  revolution  of  1834-'35, 
a  few  families  from  Texas  had  settled  at  Cor 
pus  Christi  on  the  right  bank  of  the  Nueces, 
at  its  mouth,  and  in  the  immediate  neighbor 
hood  of  that  place,  which  territory  had  never 
before  been  inhabited,  and  this  was  the  far 
thest  western  point  which  her  emigrants  had 
reached.  Every  battle  in  her  struggle  against 
Mexico  was  fought  east  of  that  river. 

Let  us  inquire  how  Texas  proceeded,  after 
her  independence,  to  extend  her  authority 
across  this  silent  and  uninhabited  waste.  In 
1836  she  passed  an  act,  declaring  her  western 
boundary  to  be  the  Rio  Grande  from  its  mouth 
to  its  source.  This  harmless  arrangement  of 
words  caused  no  commotion.  It  never  occurred 
to  the  eastern  half  of  New  Mexico  to  send 
representatives  to  her  new  government,  whose 


68  REVIEW  OF  THE 


laws  never  crossed  her  borders.  Her  twenty 
towns  and  villages  east  of  the  Rio  Grande  did 
not  dream  of  renouncing  their  allegiance  to 
Mexico.  Chihuahua  exhibited  no  sensation, 
that  a  corner  at  the  Passo  del  Norte,  famous 
for  its  wine,  had  been  rudely  severed  from  her 
state.  The  inhabitants  of  Coahuila  and  Ta- 
maulipas  still  crossed  the  great  river  to  culti 
vate  their  fields  on  its  eastern  bank,  ignorant  of 
any  lawgiver  except  the  government  of  Mexico. 
The  Mexican  collector  in  the  latter  department 
received  his  duties  and  his  fees  in  undisturbed 
security  until  the  very  day,  when  burning  their 
custom  house,  the  authorities  fled  from  Point 
Isabel  at  the  approach  of  General  Taylor. 

Mr.  Morfit,  in  the  correspondence  above  al 
luded  to,  says:  "The  additional  territory 
claimed  by  Texas  since  her  independence,  will 
increase  her  population  at  least  fifteen  thou 
sand."  The  coolness  with  which  Texas  thus 
attempted  to  transfer  to  herself  this  "vast 
slice  of  the  territory  of  Mexico,"  twelve  hun 
dred  miles  in  length,  and  containing  a  popula 
tion  of  at  least  fifteen  thousand  souls,  is  truly 
very  laughable.  "  It  was  the  intention  of  this 
government,"  writes  Mr.  Morfit,  "  to  have  claim- 


MEXICAN  WAR, 


ed  along  the  Rio  Grande  to  the  thirtieth  de 
gree  of  latitude,  and  thence  due  west  to  the 
Pacific."  Some  inconvenience  was  apprehend 
ed,  however,  and  "  it  was  thought  the  territory 
claimed  would  be  sufficient  for  a  young  repub 
lic."  How  modest  was  this  political  child,  who 
knew  no  limit  to  her  rights,  except  such  as  her 
own  sovereign  discretion  should  determine. 

Judge  Ellis,  the  president  of  the  convention 
that  formed  the  constitution  of  Texas,  and  a 
member  of  the  congress  which  adopted  the 
above  mentioned  boundary,  said,  on  a  subse 
quent  occasion,  that  the  only  object  of  Texas 
in  this  proceeding  was  to  secure  a  wide  margin 
in  her  future  negotiations  with  Mexico. 

But  it  is  idle  to  say  that  a  government  can 
by  resolution  acquire  title  to  the  territory  of 
another.  There  are  only  two  ways  in  which 
such  title  can  be  acquired,  and  these  are  treaty, 
and  conquest  followed  by  possession.  Santa 
Anna,  president  of  Mexico,  was  taken  prisoner 
by  the  Texans  in  the  battle  of  San  Jacinto. 
Before  his  liberation  he  entered  into  a  treaty 
with  Texas,  by  which  the  territory  from  the  Nu- 
eces  to  the  Rio  Grande  was  ceded  to  that  state. 
Now  every  one  knows  that  such  a  treaty  was 


70  REVIEW  OF  THE 


only  waste  paper  until  it  should  be  ratified  by 
the  proper  authority.  Texas  admitted  this  fact 
by  stipulating  as  the  condition  of  his  liberty, 
that  Santa  Anna  should  procure  the  ratifica 
tion  of  the  treaty  by  the  Mexican  congress. 
The  Mexican  congress  however  instantly  repu 
diated  the  whole  transaction,  and  this  is  the 
only  treaty  with  Mexico  of  which  Texas  can 
boast.  In  1839,  a  small  marauding  party  of 
Texans  crossed  the  Kio  Grande,  and  signalized 
themselves  by  a  masterly  retreat  before  the 
pursuing  Mexicans.  In  1 8  4 1 ,  President  Lamar 
sent  three  commissioners,  with  a  strong  civil 
force,  to  bring  under  Texan  authority  the  east 
ern  half  of  New  Mexico.  These  were  treated 
as  invaders,  captured  to  a  man,  and  marched  off 
to  the  mines.  The  world  heard  with  horror 
of  their  sufferings,  and  of  the  barbarity  of 
their  captors.  In  1842,  General  Somerville, 
having  pursued  the  Mexican  force  as  far  as  Sal- 
tillo,  ordered  a  retreat.  Between  five  and  six 
hundred  men  refused  to  obey  him,  elected  a 
new  leader,  and  set  off  down  the  Rio  Grande 
to  Mier.  They  obtained  possession  of  that 
place  in  the  night,  but  the  next  day  they  were 
all  captured  by  Ampudia,  and  sent  as  pris- 


MEXICAN  WAR. 


oners  to  the  interior  of  Mexico,  where  some 
were  immured  in  the  dungeons  of  Perote,  and 
some  were  driven  with  common  felons  to  pave 
the  streets  of  the  capital.  And  these  are  the 
only  attempts  ever  made  by  Texas  to  bring 
under  her  authority  "the  additional  territory  " 
which  she  had  resolved  into  her  possession. 

All  this  country  was  included  on  paper  in 
the  western  congressional  district  of  Texas, 
but  its  representatives  sat  in  the  Mexican  con 
gress.  She  organized  counties  extending  to 
the  Rio  Grande  on  paper,  but  their  inhabi 
tants  who  acknowledged  her  authority  lived  at 
Corpus  Christi  and  in  its  immediate  neighbor 
hood,  and  beyond  this  point  no  judicial  pro 
cess  from  her  courts  was  ever  attempted  to  be 
served. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  inhabitants  of  this 
"  additional  territory  claimed  by  Texas "  were 
all  Mexicans,  and  over  it  the  Mexican  authority 
had  never  been  for  a  moment  interrupted. 
That  government  had  a  custom  house  at  Point 
Isabel  at  its  southern  extremity,  and  another 
at  Taos  on  its  northern  limit.  Only  three 
days  after  the  resolution  consenting  to  the  an 
nexation  had  been  adopted,  congress  passed  a 


72  REVIEW  OF  THE 


law  allowing  a  drawback  on  goods  imported 
into  this  country,  and  carried  overland  via  St. 
Louis  to  the  Mexican  city  of  Santa  Fe,  where 
the  United  States  had  then  a  consul  recog 
nized  by  the  Mexican  government. 

Truth  is  always  consistent,  but  wrong  be 
trays  itself  by  contradiction.  A  very  good  il 
lustration  of  this  principle  was  pointed  out  by 
a  question  asked  in  congress  of  one  of  the  rep 
resentatives  from  Texas,  by  what  right  General 
Kearney  had  established  a  territorial  govern 
ment  in  New  Mexico  within  the  limits  of  his 
congressional  district,  and  how  his  constituents 
there  dared  to  resist  the  authority  of  the  Uni 
ted  States.,  This  was  after  the  order  had  been 
given  to  that  officer  to  march  "to  the  conquest 
of  New  Mexico,"  and  the  president  had  con 
gratulated  congress  upon  the  acquisition  of 
that  country,  announcing  that  "  the  province  of 
New  Mexico,  with  its  capital  Santa  Fe,  has 
been  captured  without  bloodshed." 

An  officer  writing  from  the  camp  opposite 
Matamoros  says:  "Our  situation  here  is  a 
most  extraordinary  one.  Eight  in  the  ene 
my's  country,  actually  occupying  their  cotton 
and  corn  fields,  the  people  of  the  soil  leaving 


MEXICAN  WAR.  73 


their  homes,  and  we  with  a  small  handful  of 
men  marching  with  colors  flying  and  drums 
beating  under  the  very  guns  of  one  of  their 
principal  cities,  while  they  with  an  army  of 
twice  our  size  at  least  make  not  the  least  re 
sistance,  net  the  first  effort  to  drive  the  inva 
ders  off."  Speaking  of  the  inhabitants,  the 
same  writer  says :  "  These  people  are  all  Span 
iards,  and  are  actuated  by  a  feeling  of  univer 
sal  hostility  against  the  United  States;  and 
since  our  arrival  nearly  all  of  them  have  left 
this  side  of  the  river,  and  gone  over,  leaving 
their  houses  and  much  valuable  property, 
notwithstanding  every  assurance  from  General 
Taylor  that  all  their  rights  and  property  would 
be  respected  by  our  government.  They  quar 
rel  among  themselves,  but  against  a  foreign  foe 
they  are  united."  General  Le  Vega  said  to 
General  Worth,  in  an  interview  held  at  Mata- 
moros  on  the  day  of  the  arrival  of  our  army 
opposite  that  place  :  "  Our  people  are  grieved 
to  see  the  flag  of  the  United  States  floating  on 
the  left  bank  of  that  river.  There  is  the 
home  of  our  people,  there  is  our  custom  house, 
there  are  our  towns  and  hamlets,  and  there 
stand  the  whitening  harvests  of  our  citizens, 


REVIEW  OF  THE 


and  we  regard  your  presence  there  as  an  act  of 
unjustifiable  invasion." 

And  against  all  this,  Texas  has  on  which  to 
found  her  claim,  neither  a  treaty,  nor  conquest, 
nor  a  moment's  occupation  of  any  part  of  the 
territory,  nor  the  exercise  of  a  smgle  act  of 
sovereignty  over  it;  nothing  except  the  reso 
lution  of  her  own  congress,  which  body,  had 
they  thought  it  expedient,  could  easily  have 
obtained  the  same  title  to  the  entire  globe. 

When  in  1842,  Mr.  Webster,  as  secretary  of 
state,  in  vindicating  the  independence  of  Tex 
as,  says,  "  no  hostile  foot  finding  rest  within 
her  territory  for  six  or  seven  years,"  he  could 
not  have  intended  to  include  in  the  term  "her 
territory,"  a  country  inhabited  exclusively  by 
Mexicans,  governed  by  Mexican  laws  and  on 
entering  which,  our  merchants  paid  duties  to 
Mexican  collectors.  He  plainly  designed  by 
his  broad  and  unqualified  expression,  to  ex 
clude  this  "  additional  territory  "  from  conside 
ration,  or  rather  esteemed  the  claim  of  Texas 
undeserving  of  notice. 

Mr.  Benton,  in  a  speech  against  the  ratifica 
tion  of  the  treaty  of  annexation,  delivered  in 
the  senate  in  1844,  says :  "  I  wash  my  hands 


MEXICAN  WAR.  75 


of  all  attempts  to  dismember  the  Mexican  re 
public  by  seizing  her  dominions  in  New  Mexi 
co,  Chihuahua,  Coahuila  and  Tamaulipas.  The 
treaty,  in  all  that  relates  to  the  boundary  of 
the  Rio  Grande,  is  an  act  of  unparalleled  out 
rage  on  Mexico.  By  this  declaration  the  thir 
ty  thousand  Mexicans  on  the  left  bank  of  the 
valley  of  the  Rio  del  Norte  are  our  citizens, 
and  standing,  in  the  language  of  the  presi 
dent's  message,  "  in  a  hostile  attitude  to  us,  and 
subject  to  be  treated  as  invaders."  Taos,  the 
seat  of  the  custom  house,  where  our  caravans 
enter  their  goods  is  ours ;  Santa  Fe,  the  capital 
of  New  Mexico,  is  ours ;  Governor  Armijo  is 
our  governor,  and  subject  to  be  tried  for  trea 
son  if  he  does  not  submit  to  us ;  twenty  Mexi 
can  towns  and  villages  are  ours,  and  their  peace 
ful  inhabitants,  cultivating  their  fields  and 
tending  their  flocks,  are  suddenly  converted 
by  a  stroke  of  the  president's  pen  into  Ameri 
can  citizens,  or  American  rebels." 

Governor  Wright,  of  New- York,  was  then  in 
the  senate,  and  voted  against  the  treaty.  In  a 
speech  delivered  the  next  autumn  he  said :  "  I 
believe  that  the  treaty,  from  the  boundaries 
that  must  be  imjAied  from  it,  embraced  a  coun- 


76  REVIEW  OF  THE 


try  to  which.  Texas  had  no  claim,  over  which 
she  had  never  acquired  jurisdiction,  and  which 
she  had  no  right  to  cede." 

Mr.  C.  J.  Ingersoll  said  in  the  house  of  rep 
resentatives  :  "  The  territorial  limits  of  Texas 
are  marked  in  the  configuration  of  this  conti 
nent  by  an  Almighty  hand.  The  stupendous 
deserts  between  the  Nueces  and  the  Rio 
Grande  are  the  natural  boundary  of  the  Anglo- 
Saxon  and  Mauritania!!  races.  There  ends  the 
valley  of  the  west ;  there  Mexico  begins. 
While  peace  is  cherished,  that  boundary  will 
be  sacred.  Not  till  the  spirit  of  conquest  ra 
ges,  will  the  people  on  either  side  molest  or 
mix  with  each  other." 

We  have  now  seen  that  the  French  province 
of  Louisiana  never  extended  west  of  the  Nue- 
ces ;  that  the  Spanish  province  of  Texas  lay 
entirely  east  of  this  boundary  ;  that  the  same 
river  was  the  farthest  western  limit  of  the 
Mexican  state  of  Texas ;  that  the  authority  of 
the  republic  of  Texas  never  extended  beyond 
the  valley  of  the  Nueces  ;  and  that  New  Mex 
ico  and  the  eastern  bank  of  the  lower  Rio 
Grande  had  always  been,  and  was  at  the  ad 
vance  of  our  army,  inhabited  by  the  Mexican 


MEXICAN  WAR.  77 


people,  and  under  undisputed  Mexican  jurisdic 
tion. 

Our  position  is  thus  established,  that  the 
march  of  our  army  to  that  river,  was  an  in 
vasion  of  the  territory  of  Mexico. 

The  same  evidence  also  establishes  another 
fact.  The  eastern  half  of  New  Mexico,  and 
the  country  between  the  desert  and  the  lower 
Kio  Grande  we  are  now  able  to  say  are  not  the 
property  of  the  state  of  Texas.  They  were 
obtained  by  the  treaty  of  1848,  and  belong  to 
the  United  States.  Texas  cannot  carry  into 
this  territory  her  laws  and  her  slavery.  It  is 
a  part  of  the  free  territory  of  the  union.  Her 
claim  is  the  height  of  insolence,  and  should  not 
be  allowed. 

But,  moreover,  the  order  directing  this  ad 
vance  was  issued  by  our  government  with  the 
full  knowledge  that  its  obedience  would  be 
such  a  hostile  invasion,  and  an  act  of  aggres 
sive  war  against  Mexico. 

Possessing  every  means  of  information,  we 
have  a  right  to  require  and  to  presume  in  gov 
ernment  full  knowledge  on  such  a  subject. 
The  plea  of  ignorance  could  be  no  extenuation 
of  the  wrong,  though  it  would  call  forth  our  de- 


78  EEVIBW  OF  THE 


rision.  To  have  taken  such  a  step  ignorantly, 
would  have  been  scarcely  less  culpable  than  to 
have  taken  it  for  the  deliberate  purpose  of  pro 
voking  war. 

But  it  was  not  taken  ignorantly.  Apart 
from  the  conclusive  presumption  to  that  effect, 
we  have  positive  evidence  that  government 
acted  with  full  knowledge  of  the  rights  of 
Mexico. 

Major  Donelson,  our  charge  d'affairs  to 
Texas,  informed  this  government  officially  in 
1845,  that  Corpus  Christi  was  the  most  west 
ern  point  occupied  by  that  state.  Our  mer 
chants  paid  duties  to  Mexico  at  Point  Isabel. 
The  order  to  General  Taylor  for  his  advance 
directed  that  the  posts  and  citizens  of  Mexico 
east  of  the  Rio  Grande  should  not  be  molest 
ed.  But  besides  these,  there  is  one  remarka 
ble  fact  by  which  the  whole  question  is  put  at 
rest.  In  October,  1845,  only  three  months 
previous  to  the  date  of  the  order  to  General 
Taylor,  Mr.  Slidell  was  instructed  by  the  exec 
utive  of  the  United  States,  to  offer  to  Mexico 
five  millions  of  dollars  for  this  identical  strip 
of  territory  east  of  the  Rio  Grande. 

Now,  in  view  of  these  facts,  the  mind  can 


MEXICAN  WAH.  79 


arrive  at  only  one  conclusion ;  that  the  march 
of  our  army  to  the  Rio  Grande  was  a  delibe 
rate  and  intentional  act  of  war  against  Mexico. 


80  REVIEW  OF  THE 


CHAPTER    VII. 


THE  Invasion  of  Mexico  the  sole  cause  of  the  War.  Tone  of  the  Mexi 
can  Minister.  Proclamation  of  Aipjia.  Progresa  of  General  Tay 
lor.  Order  of  Pared^s.  His  Proclamation.  Letter  of  Ampudia. 
Arista  gives  notice  that  he  shall  prosecute  hostilities. 

WE  have  now  advanced  far  enough  in  our 
investigation  to  see  clearly  that  the  march 
to  the  Rio  Grande  was  an  act  in  direct  viola 
tion  of  the  rights  of  Mexico ;  that  it  was  not 
only  a  violent  disregard  of  her  claims  which 
we  had  recognized  as  entitled  to  our  respect, 
but  was  an  invasion  of  her  territory,  and  that 
too  committed  with  the  full  knowledge  of  its 
hostile  character. 

"We  shall  in  the  present  chapter  show  that 
this  invasion  was  the  sole  cause  of  the  hostili 
ties  in  which  we  became  engaged.  We  shall 
then  have  established  the  truth  of  our  position 
that  on  this  act  of  our  government,  and  on 
this  alone,  the  responsibility  of  the  war  must 
forever  rest. 


MEXICAN  WAR. 


In  pursuance  of  his  orders,  General  Taylor 
broke  up  his  camp  on  the  eleventh  of  March, 
1846,  and  commenced  his  advance.  Paredes 
had  then  been  nearly  two  months  and  a  half  in 
power,  and  had  as  yet  evinced  no  hostile  dis 
position.  On  the  12th  of  March,  the  day 
after  our  army  began  its  movement,  the  Mexi 
can  minister  writes  to  Mr.  Slidell  that  "  the 
position  of  Mexico  is  one  of  defence."  In  this 
communication  her  determination  is  distinctly 
set  forth  to  refrain  from  the  commencement  of 
hostilities,  and  to  hold  herself  open  for  what 
she  conceived  to  be  honorable  negotiation. 

On  the  same  day  General  Mejia,  who  com 
manded  the  forces  of  the  department  of  Ta- 
maulipas,  made  a  proclamation,  declaring  that 
the  limits  of  Texas  were  certain  and  recogniz 
ed,  and  had  never  extended  beyond  the  Kue- 
ces,  and  that  the  American  army  was  then  ad 
vancing  to  take  possession  of  a  large  part  of 
Tamaulipas.  On  the  19th,  approaching  the 
river  San  Colorado,  the  boundary  of  the  set 
tled  portion  of  that  department,  General  Taylor 
was  met  by  a  party  of  rancheros,  who  informed 
him  that  they  were  instructed  to  oppose  his 
passage,  and  that  if  he  crossed  that  river,  the 
3* 


REVIEW  OF  THB 


act  would  be  considered  a  declaration  of  war. 
This  was  the  first  evidence  of  hostility  that 
he  had  met  with. 

Before  his  column  reached  Point  Isabel,  he 
was  met  by  a  civil  deputation  from  Mata- 
moros,  which  delivered  to  him  a  formal  pro 
test  from  the  prefect  of  the  northern  district 
of  Tamaulipas  against  his  occupation  of  the 
country.  The  Mexican  authorities  setting  fire 
to  their  public  buildings,  fled  from  Point 
Isabel  at  his  approach,  while  our  fleet  blocka 
ded  its  harbor,  and  the  28th  of  March  saw  our 
army  arrived  at  the  Rio  Grande.  On  a  bluff 
which  rises  from  the  river  opposite  Matamoros, 
and  commanding  that  town,  General  Taylor 
pitched  his  fortified  camp,  which  afterwards, 
in  memory  of  its  brave  defender,  received  the 
name  of  Fort  Brown. 

In  the  conference  between  Generals  Worth 
and  Le  Vega,  above  alluded  to,  the  latter  stated 
that  Mexico  had  not  declared  war  against  the 
United  States,  and  that  the  two  countries  were 
still  at  peace ;  but  added,  that  the  march  of 
the  American  troops  through  a  large  part  of  the 
Mexican  territory  was  an  act  of  war.  On  the 
4th  of  April,  President  Paredes  issued  an  order 


MEXICAN  WAR.  $3 


to  the  Mexican  commander  at  Matamoros,  to 
attack  our  army  "  by  every  means  that  war 
permits."  It  has  been  said  that  this  order  was 
issued  before  the  news  of  the  advance  of  our 
forces  had  reached  the  city  of  Mexico,  and  in 
accordance  with  a  predetermination  of  Paredes 
to  wage  war  for  the  recovery  of  Texas. 

Let  us  look  at  the  facts.  Nineteen  days  had 
elapsed  since,  on  the  15th  of  March,  scouting 
parties  had  been  seen  by  General  Taylor,  sent 
out  evidently,  as  he  says,  for  the  purpose  of  as 
certaining  his  movements.  The  distance  from 
Matamoros  to  Mexico  is  but  a  trifle  over  five 
hundred  miles.  The  news  of  an  invasion  would 
probably  travel  not  less  than  thirty  miles  in  a 
day,  at  which  speed  the  distance  could  be  ac 
complished  in  nineteen  days  and  less.  Un 
doubtedly  it  flew  a  hundred  miles  a  day  at 
least.  Paredes  must  then  on  the  4th  have  been 
informed  of  the  advance  of  General  Taylor. 

On  the  23d  of  the  same  month,  Paredes 
made  a  proclamation  to  the  people  of  Mexico, 
which,  taken  in  connection  with  the  attendant 
circumstances,  must  be  considered  as  showing 
conclusively  the  motives  which  led  to  the  *f  der 
of  the  4th,  the  only  one  which  liad  been  is- 


84  REVIEW  OF  THE 


sued  by  him.  In  this  proclamation  he  says : 
"  I  solemnly  announce,  that  I  do  not  declare 
war  against  the  United  States  of  America,  be 
cause  that  power  pertains  to  the  august  con 
gress  of  the  nation.  But  the  defence  of  the 
Mexican  territory,  which  the  United  States 
troops  have  invaded,  is  an  urgent  necessity, 
and  my  responsibility  would  be  immense  before 
the  country,  did  I  not  give  command  to  repel 
these  forces,  which  act  like  enemies.  I  have  so 
commanded." 

On  the  6th  of  April,  General  Taylor  wrote 
to  the  adjutant  general  as  follows  :  "  On  our 
side  a  battery  for  four  eighteen  pounders  will 
be  completed,  and  the  guns  placed  in  battery 
to-day.  These  guns  bear  directly  upon  the 
public  square  of  Matarnoros,  and  are  within 
good  range  for  demolishing  the  town."  On 
the  13th,  Ampudia,  the  general  commanding 
at  Matamoros  wrote  to  General  Taylor,  order 
ing  him  to  break  up  his  camp,  and  retire  be 
yond  the  Nueces,  to  leave  the  soil  of  the  de 
partment  of  Tarnaulipas  "while  our  govern 
ments  are  negotiating  the  pending  question  in 
relation  to  Texas,"  and  declaring  that  his  re 
maining  c*x  the  soil  of  Mexico  must  be  consid- 


MEXICAN  WAR.  §5 


ered  an  act  of  aggressive  war.  To  this  lie 
adds :  "  If  you  insist  in  remaining  within  the 
territory  of  Mexico,  it  will  clearly  result  that 
arms,  and  arms  alone,  must  decide  the  ques 
tion:"  On  the  receipt  of  this  communication, 
General  Taylor  issued  orders  to  our  naval  com 
mander  at  Brazos  Santiago,  to  blockade  the 
mouth  of  the  Rio  Grande,  for  the  purpose  of 
cutting  off  the  supplies  and  trade  of  Matamo- 
ros. 

And  not  until  eighteen  days  after  this  new 
outrage,  on  the  24th  of  April,  General  Arista, 
who  had  taken  command  of  the  Mexican  army, 
gives  notice  to  our  commander  that  he  consid 
ered  hostilities  commenced  and  should  prose 
cute  them. 

We  have  thus  seen  our  army  ordered  to  ad 
vance  one  hundred  and  forty  miles  beyond  the 
spot  which  government  was  officially  informed 
to  be  the  most  western  point  occupied  by  Tex 
as,  to  cross  that  silent  solitude  of  sand,  the 
boundary  of  the  Mississippi  valley,  and  of  the 
Anglo-Saxon  race,  and  to  enter  a  territory  in 
habited  by  citizens  of  Mexico  and  governed  by 
her  laws.  We  have  seen  the  army  take  forci 
ble  possession  of  that  country,  against  the  pro- 


86  REVIEW  OF|THE 

tests  of  its  authorities  and  its  citizens.  We 
have  seen  the  inhabitants  flying  before  our 
forces,  two  harbors  blockaded  by  our  vessels, 
and  one  of  the  principal  towns  of  northern 
Mexico  invested  by  our  batteries. 

On  the  other  hand,  there  is  not  a  single  fact 
which  tends  to  warrant  any  other  supposition, 
than  that  the  advance  of  our  army  to  the  Rio 
Grande,  and  its  continuance  on  the  soil  of  Mex 
ico,  was  the  sole  cause,  as  it  was  certainly  a  suf 
ficient  cause  of  the  hostilities  which  it  begun. 
Then  on  that  movement  must  rest  its  entire 
responsibility. 


MEXICAN  WAR.  87 


CHAPTEE   VIII. 


THE  Object  of  this  movement  of  our  Army.  The  reason  given  by  the 
Executive  not  the  real  motive,  as  proved  by  the  circumstances  of  the 
case,  and  by  the  dispatches  to  Mr.  Slidell.  The  provocations  urged 
by  our  government  considered.  The  war  designed  to  be  brought 
about  in  such  a  manner  as  to  throw  on  Mexico  the  odium  of  its  com 
mencement. 

IT  is  natural  to  seek  tlie  reason  for  a  measure 
exhibiting  in  the  executive  of  the  United  States 
such  an  unconstitutional  assumption  of  power, 
such  a  disregard  of  the  acknowledged  rights  of 
Mexico,  such  a  violation  of  the  laws  of  natural 
justice,  and  from  which  such  momentous  conse 
quences  have  flowed. 

The  reason  given  by  the  president  in  his 
message  of  May  6th,  1846,  for  this  movement, 
is,  that  "  it  became  of  urgent  necessity  to  de 
fend  that  portion  of  our  country ;" — meaning, 
we  suppose,  the  state  of  Texas. 

Now  we  will  state  a  train  of  circumstances 


88  REVIEW  OF  THE 


which  give  us  the  right  to  suppose,  nay, 
which  leave  us  no  room  to  doubt,  that  protec 
tion  to  our  citizens  was  not  its  object,  but 
that  its  expected  and  intended  result  was  w^ar 
with  Mexico. 

The  last  settlement  which  it  became  of  such 
"urgent  necessity  to  defend"  was  left  by  the 
army  one  hundred  and  forty  miles  in  their  rear. 
"We  have  seen  that  government  knew  that  this 
movement  would  be  a  violent  disregard  of  the 
claims  of  Mexico,  w^hich  itself  had  declared  en 
titled  to  its  respect,  and  moreover  that  it  would 
be  an  invasion  of  the  territory  of  Mexico,  and 
a  violation  of  the  homes  of  its  citizens.  Now 
it  is  very  difficult  to  understand  why,  if  an  in 
vasion  from  Mexico  was  apprehended,  a  posi 
tion  for  our  army  and  all  its  stores,  one  hundred 
and  forty  miles  from  the  people  and  territory 
which  it  was  to  defend,  and  which  could  be 
attacked  from  so  many  different  directions,  was 
so  much  more  advantageous  than  any  other, 
that  this  great  outrage  must  be  committed  and 
war  thus  rushed  upon  to  attain  it. 

It  is  plain  that  the  reason  given  by  the  ex 
ecutive  for  this  act,  even  if  true,  would  not  on 
ly  have  been  insufficient  as  a  justification,  but 


MEXICAN  WAR.  89 


entirely  inadequate  as  a  motive  for  its  conduct ; 
what  shall  we  say  then  when  we  find  no  such 
reason  ever  in  fact  to  have  existed  ? 

Now  government  was  at  that  time  officially 
informed  by  General  Taylor,  that  there  were 
but  few  Mexican  troops  on  or  near  the  Rio 
Grande,  that  the  inhabitants  were  friendly, 
that  appearances  indicated  a  continued  quiet 
ness,  and  that  there  wras  no  reason  to  appre 
hend  an  invasion  by  Mexico.  It  was  yet  in  ig 
norance  of  the  accession  of  Paredes  at  the  time 
that  the  order  to  advance  was  transmitted. 

Is  it  possible  to  conceive  what  "  urgent  ne 
cessity"  the  peaceful  circumstances  of  the  times 
created,  which  rendered  it  imperative  that  our 
national  obligations  should  be  so  disregarded, 
this  country  invaded,  and  the  horrors  of  war 
endangered  and  provoked  ? 

No,  it  is  not  possible  that  government  could 
have  been  influenced  to  this  course  by  any 
such  considerations. 

But  the  circumstances  attending  this  move 
ment  not  only  show  that  the  defence  of  Texas 
could  not  have  been  its  object,  they  also  tell 
us  what  its  object  was. 

On  the  20th  of  January,  a  week  after  the 


90  REVIEW  OF  THE 


order  for  his  advance  had  been  issued  to  Gen 
eral  Taylor,  the  secretary  of  state  writes  to  Mr. 
Slidell :  "  Should  the  Mexican  government,  by 
finally  refusing  to  receive  you,  consummate  the 
act  of  folly  and  bad  faith  of  which  they  have 
afforded  indications,  nothing  will  remain  for 
this  government  but  to  take  the  redress  of  the 
wrongs  of  our  citizens  into  our  own  hands." 
"The  government,  in  anticipation  of  the  final 
refusal  of  Mexico  to  receive  you,  have  ordered 
the  army  to  advance,  and  take  a  position  on  the 
left  bank  of  the  Rio  Grande,  and  have  ordered 
the  fleet  into  the  gulf."  Here  we  have  the  true 
reason  of  this  movement  unequivocally  set 
forth.  Congress  and  the  people  were  attempt 
ed  to  be  imposed  upon  with  the  falsehood,  that 
its  object  was  to  defend  our  citizens  from  at 
tack,  and  our  country  from  invasion ;  but  Mr. 
Slidell  was  informed,  that  it  was  done  in  an 
ticipation  of  a  refusal  to  receive  him.  And 
what  was  the  army  sent  there  to  do  if  he  should 
be  refused  ?  The  next  sentence  explains  this 
also.  "  The  president  will  "then  be  enabled  to 
act  with  vigor  and  promptitude,  the  moment 
that  congress  shall  give  him  authority."  Then 
according  to  the  express  avowal  of  the  govern- 


MEXICAN  WAR. 


ment,  tlie  army  was  sent  across  that  great  nat 
ural  boundary,  and  to  the  bank  of  "that 
grand  and  solitary  river,"  to  act. 

A  week  later  the  secretary  writes  again : 
"  should  that  government  refuse  to  receive  you, 
the  cup  of  forbearance  will  then  have  been 
exhausted.  Nothing  will  then  remain  but  a 
resort  to  arms." 

Mr.  Slidell  writes  from  Mexico :  "  The  most 
extravagant  pretensions  will  be  made  and  in 
sisted  on,  until  the  Mexican  people  shall  be 
convinced  by  hostile  demonstrations,  that  our 
difficulties  must  be  settled  promptly,  either  by 
negotiation,  or  by  the  sword."  This  letter  was 
received  in  Washington  on  the  12th  of  Janua 
ry,  and  the  next  day  the  order  was  issued  for 
the  advance  of  our  army. 

The  army  now  being  prepared  ato  act,"  Mr. 
Slidell  applies  to  the  government  of  Paredes 
for  reception ;  and  assuming  a  tone  of  offended 
dignity,  he  thus  announces  the  ultimatum  of 
his  government.  "  The  present  state  of  quasi 
hostility,  is  incompatible  with  the  dignity 
and  interests  of  the  United  States,  and  it 
is  now  for  Mexico  to  decide  whether  it  shall 


92  REVIEW  OF  THE 


give  place  to  negotiation,  or  to  an  open  rup 
ture." 

Receive  the  minister  which  the  United  States 
chooses  to  send,  abandon your  position  and  pre 
tensions,  acknowledge  that  all  your  acts  for  a 
year  towards  her  have  been  groundless  and  ab 
surd  ;  do  this  instantly,  not  a  word  of  explana 
tion,  or  feel  the  power  of  her  arms.  Such  is 
the  character  and  tone  of  this  strange  diplo 
macy. 

Then  the  reason  given  by  the  executive  for 
this  movement  was  not  the  motive  which  led 
to  it,  but,  made  with  a  full  knowledge  of  all  the 
circumstances  which  we  have  described,  the 
deliberate  purpose  which  prompted  the  act 
was  war  with  Mexico  in  the  event  of  Mr.  Sli- 
delPs  rejection.  We  feel  a  degree  of  shame  in 
thus  convicting  the  executive  out  of  its  own 
mouth  of  such  a  piece  of  duplicity,  of  telling 
in  a  solemn  message  such  an  untruth  to  the 
American  people  and  to  the  world. 

It  becomes  a  matter  of  serious  inquiry,  what 
were  the  provocations,  which  had  thus  worn 
out  the  patience  of  our  government,  and  ex 
hausted  its  "cup  of  forbearance."  As  but 


MEXICAN  WAE.  93 


two  causes  of  complaint  have  ever  been  urged 
against  Mexico,  we  must  presume  these  to  have 
been  all  that  existed. 

The  first  was,  that  at  the  annexation  of  Tex 
as  she  ceased  to  pay  the  instalments  of  the  debt 
to  our  citizens,  which  had  been  adjudged  against 
her.  The  other  injury,  which  was  so  grievous 
that  it  left  no  alternative  "  but  a  resort  to 
arms,"  was  the  refusal  to  receive  a  resident 
minister  until  the  difficulty  growing  out  of  the 
annexation  had  been  adjusted ;  "  when"  said 
Mexico,  "  diplomatic  intercourse  will  follow  of 


course." 


We  have  a  right  to  presume  that  these 
were  not  sufficient  grounds  of  war,  because 
our  government  always  denied  the  fact  that  it 
made  war  on  their  account.  It  exerted  all  its 
ingenuity  to  throw  upon  Mexico  the  odium  of 
its  commencement. 

And  here  again  we  see  the  inconsistency  of 
wrong.  The  executive  in  its  message  of  De 
cember,  1845,  and  still  more  fully  in  that  of 
the  following  year,  recounts  the  injuries  which 
our  citizens  had  received  from  Mexico  through 
a  long  series  of  years,  and  which  still  remained 
unredressed.  Now  the  only  tendency  of  this 


94  REVIEW  OF  THE 


recital  would  be  to  justify  our  government  in 
commencing  a  war.  If  the  argument  is  not 
valid  for  this,  it  cannot  be  for  any  purpose. 
But  we  are  immediately  told  that  Mexico  be 
gan  the  war,  that  we  made  every  effort  to  avoid 
it,  and  that  it  was  forced  upon  us  by  her  inva 
sion.  Through  many  pages  government  is  la 
boring  to  justify  an  act,  which  it  is  all  the 
while  insisting  that  it  did  not  commit.  These 
two  strings  were  badly  out  of  tune,  and  the 
performance  on  them  together  produced  a  hor 
rible  discord. 

We  shall  not  consume  the  time  of  our  rea 
der  in  proving  that  it  was  a  crime  for  a  great 
nation  to  make  war  upon  a  weak  and  distracted 
state  upon  such  pretexts  as  these.  The  pay 
ment  of  her  debt  by  Mexico  had  been  suspend 
ed  for  about  two  years.  The  claims  of  our 
citizens  on  France  for  her  spoliations  remained 
neglected  by  that  government  for  twenty 
years,  and  were  at  last  amicably  settled. 

We  have  seen  that  in  accordance  with  na 
tional  usage,  and  with  the  far  higher  obliga 
tions  of  justice  and  magnanimity,  the  United 
States,  instead  of  visiting  Mexico  with  their 
vengeance,  on  account  of  her  refusal  to  receive 


MEXICAN  WAR.  95 


their  minister,  should  have  yielded  to  her  just 
and  proper  demand. 

A  quarrelsome  people  seeking  a  cause  for 
hostility,  a  tyrant  wanting  an  excuse  for 
blood,  an  ambitious  and  selfish  government 
envying  its  neighbor  her  possessions,  and 
watching  an  opportunity  to  despoil  her  of 
them,  might  take  up  with  such  imagined  pro 
vocation.  But  that  a  Christian  government,  a 
friend  of  peace,  a  free  enlightened  people, 
should  go  to  war  on  such  pretexts  as  these, 
should  use  such  language  as  we  have  read,  and 
adopt  such  measures  as  we  have  witnessed,  is 
as  incomprehensible  as  it  is  disgraceful. 

But  war  with  Mexico  was  not  the  only  ob 
ject  of  the  movement  to  the  Rio  Grande.  It 
was  indeed  its  great  ultimate  end,  but  there 
was  an  incidental  object  which  it  was  designed 
to  effect,  with  the  meanness  of  which  the  act 
of  commencing  war  upon  frivolous  pretexts 
can  aspire  to  no  rivalry. 

We  shall  show,  that  the  object  of  the  ad 
vance  to  that  river  was  not  only  to  involve 
this  country  in  a  war  with  Mexico,  but  was 
part  of  a  deliberate  contrivance  to  bring  the 


96  REVIEW  OF  THE 


war  about  in  such  a  manner  as  to  throw  on 
Mexico  the  odium  t)f  its  commencement. 

The  facts  of  the  case  present  a  strange  enig 
ma.  This  hostile  act  was  committed  with  an 
eagerness  which  led  to  an  unconstitutional  as 
sumption  of  power  by  the  executive.  That  it  was 
aware  of  the  unconstitutionally  of  this  order, 
is  evident  from  the  fact  which  we  have  already 
seen,  that  to  conceal  its  character  a  deliberate 
falsehood  was  told  to  congress  and  the  peo 
ple. 

The  secretary  of  state  informed  Mr.  Slidell, 
as  we  have  seen,  that,  having  ordered  the  army 
to  the  Rio  Grande,  the  president  would  be  en 
abled  to  act  with  vigor  and  promptitude  the 
moment  that  congress  should  give  him  author 
ity.  The  army  encamps  on  the  bank  of  the  Rio 
Grande.  The  minister  is  rejected.  Congress 
remains  in  session  ready  to  receive  any  commu 
nication  from  the  executive.  But  that  officer 
never  asks  for  authority.  Nearly  two  months 
elapse,  but  the  executive,  who  was  to  act  with 
such  vigor  and  promptitude,  remains  entirely 
inactive.  The  army  meanwhile  has  sat  quietly 
down  on  acknowledged  Mexican  soil,  blocka- 


MEXICAN  WAR. 


ding  her  harbors,  and  threatening  one  of  her 
cities,  but  instructed  not  to  molest  her  posts 
and  citizens,  not  to  strike  the  first  blow. 

Why  was  this  strange  silence  ?  There  can 
be  only  one  explanation.  The  purpose  of  the 
executive  was  accomplished  when  the  army 
took  up  its  position  on  the  Bio  Grande.  It 
was  not  sent  there  to  act,  but  to  provoke  a 
blow.  The  case  admits  of  no  other  supposi 
tion.  The  presence  of  the  army  accomplished 
no  other  object.  Time  has  failed  to  disclose 
to  us  any  other  object  for  which  it  could  have 
been  sent  there  and  maintained  there,  in  the 
manner  that  it  was. 

The  most  favorable  interpretation  that  can 
be  put  on  Mr.  Buchanan's  dispatches  to  Mr. 
Slidell  is,  that  the  army  was  sent  to  the  Rio 
Grande  for  the  purpose  of  intimidation.  Thh 
object  failed.  Mr.  Slidell  was  rejected.  Gov 
ernment  knew  it.  He  was  ordered  home,  but 
the  army  was  not  moved.  Of  course  the  gov 
ernment  who  kept  it  there  had  something  for 
it  to  do.  It  could  no  longer  serve  to  intimi 
date,  it  could  only  irritate  and  provoke.  The 
executive  must  have  known  that  hostilities 
would  be  the  inevitable  consequence  of  its 
4 


98  REVIEW  OF  THE 


presence.  Then  to  incite  Mexico  to  war  must 
have  been  the  design  of  the  movement. 

If  the  antecedent  circumstances  of  the  case 
admit  of  no  other  conclusion  than  this,  those 
which  follow  establish  its  truth  beyond  a  ques 
tion. 

During  this  "  masterly  inactivity"  the  plot 
was  ripening.  The  carefully  laid  train  was 
burning  up  to  the  mine.  Mexico,  having  re" 
ceived  injuries  which  would  arouse  the  spirit 
of  a  slave,  having  seen  hostilities  committed 
against  her  on  account  of  the  "  urgent  neces 
sity  to  defend  that  portion  of  our  country," 
which  no  nation  on  earth  would  have  endured, 
finally  declares  her  determination  to  prosecute 
the  hostilities  which  the  United  States  had 
commenced,  and  sends  her  army  across  the  Rio 
(Jrande  to  attack  the  invaders. 

On  the  receipt  of  this  intelligence,  the  ex 
ecutive  sends  a  war  message  to  congress. 
"Mexico,"  it  declares,  "  has  passed  the  bounda 
ry  of  the  United  States,  has  invaded  our  ter 
ritory,  and  shed  American  blood  on  American 
soil ;"  and  it  calls  upon  the  nation  to  punish 
this  outrage,  and  to  prosecute  to  "  an  honora 
ble  peace  "  the  war  thus  "  forced  upon  us." 


MEXICAN  WAR.  99 


For  the  moment  we  will  pass  over  the  right 
of  Mexico,  and  only  consider  the  territory  to 
have  been  in  dispute.  While  territory  re 
mains  in  this  situation,  and  before  the  claims 
of  the  parties  have  been  adjusted,  the  right  of 
one  claimant  is  always  presumed  to  be  equally 
good  with  that  of  the  other.  In  the  first  en 
counter  between  detachments  of  the  two 
armies,  the  attack  was  made  by  the  Ameri 
cans.  The  American  blood  shed,  in  the  lan 
guage  of  the  executive,  on  our  own  soil,  and 
about  which  so  much  patriotic  indignation  was 
wasted,  turned  out  to  have  been  shed  by  a 
Mexican  company  in  repelling  a  charge  of 
American  cavalry,  in  self-defence,  against  a 
wanton  attack  made  upon  it  by  the  direction 
of  the  executive  of  the  United  States,  and  un 
der  an  order  from  the  commander-in-chief  to 
capture  and  "  destroy  "  it. 

Now  if  the  invasion  of  that  territory  and 
the  shedding  the  blood  of  Americans  there  by 
Mexico  were  a  sufficient  cause  of  war  for  us, 
its  prior  invasion,  the  first  attack  and  the  shed 
ding  the  blood  of  Mexicans  there  by  us  were 
at  least  an  equal  cause  of  war  for  her. 

But  moreover,  its  own  acts  show  that  the  ex- 


100  REVIEW  OP  THE 

ecutive,  when  it  made  that  declaration  to  the 
world,  knew  it  to  be  totally  and  unqualifiedly 
untrue.  We  know  that  this  is  strong  lan 
guage  ;  but  when  the  occupation  of  territory 
by  Mexico,  which  government  knew  to  be  her 
own,  and  for  which  it  had  just  offered  her  five 
millions  of  dollars,  is  pronounced  to  be  a  suffi 
cient  cause  of  war  against  her,  how  can  the  in 
consistency  be  reconciled?  The  one  must 
have  been  squandering,  or  the  other  must  be 
false. 

There  appears  also  in  the  executive  a  desire 
to  kindle  in  the  minds  of  our  people  a  spirit 
of  war  against  Mexico.  Having,  in  pursuit  of 
its  remorseless  purpose  brought  the  two  coun 
tries  into  collision,  its  next  object  was  to  enlist 
the  enthusiasm  of  the  people  in  the  war  which 
it  purposed  to  wage.  "  Texas  organized  coun 
ties  extending  to  the  Rio  Grande,  their  inhab 
itants  are  represented  in  your  congress,"  pro 
claims  the  government  which  had  just  been 
officially  informed  that  Corpus  Christi  was 
the  most  western  point  occupied  by  that  state. 
"After  the  battle  of  San  Jacinto,  Mexico  never 
crossed  the  Rio  Grande,"  proclaims  the  same 
authority,  whose  merchants  paid  duties  to  Mex- 


MEXICAN  WAR. 


ioo  at  Point  Isabel,  and  which  had  ordered 
General  Taylor  to  respect  her  posts  and  citi 
zens  east  of  that  river.  "  Louisiana  extended 
to  the  Rio  Grande.  That  was  the  boundary 
of  our  original  possessions.  Jefferson,  Madi 
son,  Monroe,  Pinkney,  Adams,  Benton  and 
Clay,  have  all  declared  it,"  announces  the  ex 
ecutive,  laboring  by  the  introduction  of  a  blind 
and  antiquated  claim  to  excite  the  national 
pride  and  to  complete  the  confusion  in  which 
it  had  involved  the  transaction.  "  Patriots  of 
America,  avenge  the  blood  of  your  fellow-citi 
zens  shed  on  you  own  soil!"  echo  throughout 
the  land  the  organs  of  that  government  which 
had  just  offered  to  Mexico  five  millions  of  dol 
lars  for  the  country.  The  excitable  nation 
swallows  this  series  of  falsehoods,  and  rushes 
with  a  blind  enthusiasm  into  the  contest. 
Thus  the  object  of  government  was  attained, 
we  were  involved  in  war  with  Mexico,  and  our 
citizens  believed  the  scandalous  deception  that 
she  was  the  aggressor,  and  we  the  wronged 
and  insulted  nation,  compelled  to  fight,  but 
ready  to  sacrifice  all  but  our  honor  for  the  sake 
of  peace* 


102  REVIEW  OF  THE 


CHAPTER    IX. 


THE  Declaration  of  War.     The  duty  of  Congress.     The  consequences 
which  would  have  followed  the  performance  of  that  duty. 

IN  his  message  of  the  llth  of  May,  the 
president  declared  that  war  existed,  and  not 
withstanding  all  our  efforts  to  avoid  it,  existed 
by  the  act  of  Mexico  herself;  and  recom 
mended  the  most  prompt  and  energetic  mea 
sures  to  bring  the  war  to  a  speedy  and  success 
ful  termination. 

An  act  providing  for  the  prosecution  of  "the 
existing  war,"  and  authorizing  the  president 
to  employ  the  entire  military  force  of  the  coun 
try,  and  to  accept  the  services  of  fifty  thousand 
volunteers  for  its  prosecution,  was  passed  by 
congress  on  the  13th,  the  preamble  of  which 
declared,  that  "  by  the  act  of  the  republic  of 
Mexico,  a  state  of  war  exists  between  that  gov 
ernment  and  the  United  States." 


MEXICAN  WAR.  lf)3 


Let  us  suppose  a  great  and  Christian  govern 
ment,  a  friend  of  peace,  to  have  become  so  lit 
tle  the  slave  of  pride,  that  it  is  willing  to  ac 
knowledge  that  it  has  done  wrong.  Let  us 
suppose,  that  this  government  claims  the  title 
to  territory  which  has  been  for  a  long  time  in 
the  possession  of  another  power,  that  it  has  re 
cognized  the  claims  of  this  power,  and  has  pro 
vided  that  the  dispute  should  be  settled  by  ne 
gotiation.  Let  us  further  suppose,  that  while 
the  question  remains  yet  unsettled,  the  execu 
tive  of  this  government  should  send  an  ar 
my  to  take  possession  of  the  entire  territory 
in  dispute ;  that  this  army  after  being  encamp 
ed  for  a  month  on  its  farthest  boundary  where 
it  had  committed  undisguised  acts  of  hostility, 
having  received  protests  from  the  inhabitants 
and  authorities  against  its  advance,  and  orders 
from  the  government  to  retire,  is  at  last  attack 
ed,  and  after  some  bloodshed  becomes  placed  in 
a  perilous  situation,  and  the  executive  should 
communicate  these  facts  to  the  legislature. 
What  course  of  conduct  might  we  expect  that 
body  to  adopt  ?  Would  it  declare  that  war 
existed  by  the  act  of  its  adversary,  and  place 
means  in  the  hands  of  the  executive  to  prose- 


104  REVIEW  OF  THE 

cute  the  contest  with  energy  ?  We  will  as 
sume  that  it  would  not  make  this  declaration, 
unless  it  had  become  satisfied  that  it  was  true ; 
nor  take  this  irretrievable  step,  unless  it  was 
convinced  that  its  cause  was  just.  Its  mem 
bers  would  first  inquire,  what  is  the  cause  of 
these  hostilities.  They  would  not  look  far 
off,  and  perplex  themselves  with  speculations 
as  to  what  might  have  been  their  remote  oc 
casion  ;  but  would  be  satisfied  with  the  obvi 
ous  and  necessary  cause  which  had  been  com 
municated  to  them.  They  would  then  ask, 
was  this  act  of  our  executive  justifiable.  And 
to  answer  this,  they  would  only  need  to  learn 
that  the  claim  of  their  adversary  still  remain 
ed  unadjusted,  and  that  their  army  found  the 
country  as  it  had  ever  been,  inhabited  by  peo 
ple  of  that  nation  alone,  and  governed  by  its 
laws.  They  would  inquire  what  cause  existed 
to  warrant  such  an  aggression.  And  when 
they  were  told  that  the  only  provocation  which 
had  "  exhausted  the  cup  of  forbearance"  had 
been  a  neglect  for  two  years  to  pay  her  debt 
by  their  adversary,  and  a  refusal  to  receive 
their  minister,  they  would  not  hesitate  to  say 
we  have  done  wrong.  We  have  provoked  and 


MEXICAN  WAR.  1Q5 


began  a  war  without  a  cause.  We  cannot  con 
demn  in  our  adversaries  that  patriotism,  for 
the  want  of  which  we  would  execrate  our  own 
countrymen.  We  cannot  prosecute  this  war 
with  justice.  It  is  opposed  to  every  princi 
ple  of  humanity  and  every  precept  of  religion. 
"  Deity  has  not  a  single  attribute  that  would 
side  with  us  in  such  a  contest." 

Their  only  inquiry  would  be  how  to  prevent 
the  shedding  another  drop  of  blood.  They 
would  order  the  invading  army  to  return  im 
mediately  within  their  own  undisputed  terri 
tory.  They  would  select  the  greatest  and 
wisest  of  their  number,  and  send  them  with 
out  delay  to  arrest  hostilities  and  negotiate  a 
peace. 

Surely  the  ingenuous  mind  can  require  no 
argument  to  prove  the  abstract  justice  of  such 
a  course,  and  the  wrong  which  would  mark  any 
other  conduct.  We  envy  not  the  moral  sense 
of  that  man,  whose  mind  does  not  rush  instinct 
ively  to  the  conclusion,  that  there  could  be  no 
other  course  consistent  with  Christianity  and 
justice. 

Such,  as  we  have  shown,  was  the  case  of  the 
United  States  and  Mexico,  as  viewed  most  fa- 


106  REVIEW  OF  THE 

vorably  for  the  former.  This  high  duty  de 
volved  upon  congress.  There  existed  no  cir 
cumstances  which  could  alter  or  modify  it. 
This  duty  they  did  not  perform.  Only  four 
teen  in  the  house  of  representatives  and  four 
in  the  senate  refused  to  vote  for  a  declaration, 
which,  being  false,  no  one  of  them  could  have 
\  known  to  be  true,  and  for  an  act  whose  conse- 
I  quences  they  could  not  foresee,  founded  on  the 
f  assumed  truth  of  that  declaration.  We  say 
founded  on  its  assumed  truth,  for  we  would 
fain  vindicate  the  common  sense  of  congress, 
though  at  the  expense  of  its  principles,  from 
the  imputation  of  authorizing  these  vast  prepa 
rations  which  three  months  could  not  see  com 
pleted,  and  placing  at  the  disposal  of  the  ex 
ecutive  this  great  force,  which  could  scarcely 
within  the  same  time  be  brought  into  the  field, 
merely  to  rescue  General  Taylor  from  a  peril 
ous  position  where  he  must  be  conquered  or 
from  which  he  must  be  rescued  almost  before 
the  vote  of  congress  could  be  taken.  Reflec 
tion  and  wisdom  seem  to  have  fled  frightened 
at  the  echo  from  the  battle  field. 

We  have  supposed  that  the  action  of  con 
gress  on  this  subject  should  have  been  regula- 


MEXICAN  WAH. 


ted,  not  by  its  probable  consequences,  but  sole 
ly  by  a  sense  of  duty.  It  may  be  well,  how 
ever,  to  glance  at  the  more  obvious  results 
which  would  have  followed  such  an  exhibition 
of  justice. 

There  cannot,  we  think,  be  a  reasonable 
doubt  that  such  a  course  would  have  effected 
an  immediate  suspension  of  hostilities,  and  a 
speedy  peace.  Mexico  surely  did  not  desire 
war,  and  the  earnest  and  generous  manner  in 
which  these  objects  would  have  been  sought 
would  have  ensured  their  attainment.  In  this 
peace  the  uti  possidetis  would  probably  have 
formed  the  basis  for  the  establishment  of  the 
boundary ;  securing  to  the  United  States  every 
foot  of  territory  which  they  became  entitled 
to  by  the  annexation  of  Texas.  The  claims  of 
our  citizens  upon  Mexico  would  have  been  ad 
justed,  and  the  most  liberal  commercial  rela 
tions  would  probably  have  been  established 
between  the  two  countries. 

Just,  magnanimous  and  generous  conduct  is 
never  lost  even  upon  a  savage.  The  human 
mini  never  becomes  so  brutalized  that  it  can 
not  in  some  degree  be  softened  and  prompted 


108  REVIEW  OF  THE 

to  rivalry  by  its  exhibition.  Its  tendency  in 
this  case  must  have  been  to  dissipate  the  na 
tional  prejudices  of  Mexico,  to  liberalize  her 
views  and  policy,  and  to  establish  a  lasting 
friendship  toward  us.  There  would  have  been 
a  nobleness  in  the  deed  which  would  have  en 
sured  for  us  a  higher  respect  among  foreign 
nations  than  a  thousand  victories.  There  is 
something  in  the  heart  of  man  which  leads  him, 
oftentimes  unconsciously,  to  imitate  the  con 
duct  and  the  disposition  which  he  admires  in 
others.  Who  can  estimate  the  silent  influence 
of  that  nation  which  would  not  do  wrong  ? 

But  more  valuable  than  all  its  other  conse 
quences,  would  have  been  the  effect  of  the  act 
upon  our  national  character.  Presenting  be 
fore  the  people  an  example  which  would  have 
tended  to  check  their  strange  eagerness  for 
war  and  reckless  desire  for  the  acquisition  of 
territory,  it  would  have  exalted  and  refined 
their  sense  of  national  justice,  and  would  have 
given  birth  to  a  better  love  for  their  country, 
a  purer  pride  in  her  glory  won  by  such  acts  as 
these,  and  a  higher  respect  for  her  laws. 

We  have  finished  our  examination  of  the 


MEXICAN  WAB.  109 


causes  which  led  to  the  Mexican  war,  and  the 
means  which  should  have  been  adopted  by  our 
government  to  avoid  it. 

We  have  seen,  that  its  occasion  was  the  an 
nexation  of  Texas  to  the  United  States,  a  mea 
sure  which,  though  not  inconsistent  with  jus 
tice  to  Mexico,  must  be  acknowledged  to  have 
been  uncalled  for,  and  in  view  of  its  probable 
consequences,  to  have  been  unwise  and  wrong. 
We  have  seen,  that  the  war  might  have  been 
prevented  by  sending  a  commissioner  to  Mexi 
co;  for  its  refusal  to  do  which,  the  United 
States  can  offer  no  excuse.  We  have  seen,  that 
the  advance  of  our  army  to  the  Rio  Grande 
was  a  deliberate  invasion  of  the  known  territo 
ry  of  Mexico,  and  was  the  sole  cause  of  the  war. 
We  have  seen,  that  this  invasion  was  not  for 
the  defence  of  our  territory,  but  was  the  result 
of  a  determination  to  wage  war  against  Mexico 
in  the  event  of  the  rejection  of  our  minister. 
We  have  seen  this  determination  studiously 
concealed,  and  means  adopted  to  goad  Mexico 
to  hostilities ;  and  when  these  had  proved  suc 
cessful,  we  have  seen  our  country  incited  to  the 
contest  by  the  falsehood  that  her  army  had  in 
vaded  our  soil.  And  we  have  seen  moreover, 


REVIEW  OF  THE 


that  congress  might  probably  have  stayed  the 
war  even  after  its  commencement.  Then  on  us 
must  rest  the  whole  responsibility  of  this  un 
provoked  and  wanton  aggression,  as  clearly 
without  justification  as  it  is  without  remedy. 

This  is  a  hard  judgment,  but  we  solemnly  be 
lieve  that  it  is  the  voice  of  truth,  and  that  when 
the  prejudices  and  passions  of  the  present 
hour  shall  have  cleared  away,  when  the  causes 
of  this  war  shall  have  become  more  universally 
known,  and  history  shall  have  sifted  the  truth 
from  error,  posterity  will  record  the  same  de 
cision — that  the  misconduct  of  our  rulers  in 
volved  this  country  in  a  crime  for  which  no 
extenuation  can  be  pleaded,  and  brought  upon 
us  a  calamity  whose  extent  we  can  but  imper 
fectly  realize. 


MEXICAN  WAR. 


CHAPTER    X. 


THE  Objects  of  the  War.     Conquest.     Its  Progress.     The  Treaty  of 
peace.  * 

WE  come  now  to  inquire  into  the  objects  of 
this  war,  in  which  examination  we  shall  give 
a  general  view  of  its  progress  and  events. 

The  president,  in  his  message  of  December, 
1846,  says:  "The  war  has  not  been  waged 
with  a  view  to  conquest,  but  having  been  be 
gun  by  Mexico,  it  has  been  carried  into  the  en 
emy's  country  with  a  view  to  obtain  an  honor 
able  peace,  and  thereby  secure  an  ample  in 
demnity  for  the  expenses  of  the  war,  as  well  as 
to  our  much  injured  citizens,  who  hold  large 
demands  against  Mexico." 

The  meaning  of  this  enigmatical  expression, 
"  an  honorable  peace,"  something  which  was  to 
possess  such  a  great  value  in  ready  money,  we 
shall  discover  presently. 


REVIEW  OF  THE 


Now  we  have  seen  that  the  war  was  not 
commenced  by  Mexico,  but  by  our  govern 
ment.  How  an  honorable  peace  could  follow 
such  a  war,  causeless  and  disgraceful  to  a  chris- 
tian  people,  it  is  beyond  our  power  to  compre 
hend.  The  wrong  which  marked  its  inception 
must  attend  every  step  of  its  progress.  The 
obligation  to  arrest  it  which  existed  at  its  com 
mencement,  must  be  renewed  every  moment 
of  its  continuance.  Its  victories  must  be  mur 
der,  its  acquisitions  must  be  robbery. 

We  have  seen  a  determined  purpose  in  the 
executive  to  effect  a  war,  a  purpose  for  the  at 
tainment  of  which  truth  and  the  '  constitution 
were  alike  disregarded. 

And  for  this  purpose  the  messages  of  the 
executive  furnish  us  with  no  motive.  One 
thing  however  is  plain.  The  neglect  of  Mexico 
to  pay  her  debt  to  our  citizens  and  her  refusal 
to  receive  our  minister  were  not  its  causes. 
Had  they  been,  had  the  declarations  of  the  ex 
ecutive  to  Mr.  Slidell  been  sincere,  had  it  believ 
ed  its  own  story,  that  the  rights  and  honor  of  the 
country  had  been  invaded,  and  that  indeed 
nothing  remained  "  but  a  resort  to  arms,"  it  was 
clearly  its  duty  to  lay  the  matter  before  con- 


MEXICAN  WAB, 


gress,  which  was  then  in  session,  and  which 
could  alone  adopt  the  necessary  measures.  It 
would  undoubtedly  have  done  so.  Deceit 
and  unconstitutional  means  would  not  then 
have  been  resorted  to.  Besides,  government 
stoutly  denied  that  it  made  war  at  all,  thereby 
showing  its  own  consciousness  that  the  reasons 
which  it  had  before  declared  to  have  exhausted 
its  cup  of  forbearance,  were  not  only  ridiculous 
as  a  justification,  but  useless  as  excuses  for 
commencing  the  war.  No,  these  could  not 
have  been  the  reasons  which  led  to  it. 

Then  what  were  they  ?  What  was  the  pur 
pose  for  which  this  cunningly  contrived  plot 
was  laid  to  involve  the  country  in  a  war  with 
out  the  sanction  of  congress,  and  falsehoods 
were  employed  to  incite  the  people  to  its  pros 
ecution  ? 

Mr.  Calhoun,  so  late  as  January,  1847,  de 
clared  in  the  senate,  that  up  to  that  hour  the 
causes  of  the  war  were  left  to  conjecture.  All 
was  then  involved  in  mystery.  Since  the 
words  of  Mr.  Calhoun  were  uttered,  day  has 
dawned  upon  this  darkness,  and  the  mystery 
is  revealed.  The  reasons  given  to  Mr.  Slidell 
are  now  showu  to  iave  been  as  false  as  was  the 


114  ,  .REVIEW  OF  THE 


cry  of  defence  by  which  the  nation  was  arous 
ed.  That  amiable  sympathy  for  "  our  much 
injured  citizens"  was  all  an  imposition.  The 
pretended  necessity  to  take  the  redress  of  their 
wrongs  into  our  own  hands,  was  only  a  cloak 
to  a  darker  purpose. 

The  enigma  is  solved,  and  as  at  the  touch  of 
the  enchanter's  wand,  all  the  contradictions 
which  we  have  exposed  stand  in  perfect  har 
mony.  They  crystalize  in  wondrous  order 
around  one  all-pervading  purpose. 

Conquest  was  the  animating  idea  of  all  this 
scheme.  The  acquisition  of  the  territory  of 
another  nation  was  the  sole  purpose  for  which 
this  war  was  devised  and  carried  on.  All  the 
pretended  sympathy  was  for  this.  This  it  was 
which  so  mysteriously  exhausted  the  cup  of 
forbearance.  The  country  of  Mexico  was  in 
vaded  for  this  and  this  alone. 

This  fact  we  shall  proceed  to  establish  by 
proof,  convincing  even  to  scepticism  itself. 

When  we  know  that  a  person  desires  the 
possession  of  any  particular  object,  and  all  his 
actions  for  a  long  time  after  are  precisely 
adapted  to  its  attainment,  and  finally  he  does 
obtain  and  possess  it,  and  expresses  his  gratifica- 


MEXICAN  WAR.  H5 


tion  at  the  acquisition  which  lie  has  made,  we 
have  a  right  to  suppose  that  its  attainment 
was  his  constant  purpose  during  all  that  time, 
and  that  the  adaptation  of  his  acts  to  that  at 
tainment  was  but  the  carrying  out  of  his  origi 
nal  design. 

In  November,  1845,  the  president  instruct 
ed  Mr.  Slidell  to  negotiate  with  Mexico  for 
the  purchase  of  the  country  down  to  the  Rio 
Grande,  New-Mexico,  and  the  two  Californias. 
He  was  authorized  to  pay  not  more  than  five 
millions  of  dollars  for  the  first,  ten  millions  for 
the  first  and  second,  and  twenty-five  millions 
for  the  whole,  and  was  instructed  to  procure 
them  as  much  cheaper  as  possible.  He  was 
directed  and  encouraged  by  great  personal 
prospects  to  use  his  utmost  exertions  to  pur 
chase  the  territory. 

We  shall  divide  the  war  with  Mexico  into 
two  acts.  In  the  first  we  shall  see  the  posses 
sion  of  this  identical  country  secured,  and  our 
authority  established  over  it ;  and  in  the  eeo 
ond  we  shall  witness  the  process  by  which  the 
title  to  it  was  extorted. 

The  Mexican  army  on  the  Rio  Grande  hav 
ing  been  defeated  in  two  desperate  and  une* 


REVIEW  OF  THE 


qual  contests,  General  Taylor  moved  with  his 
column,  now  increased  to  about  six  thousand 
men,  upon  Monterey.  He  arrived  before  that 
city  on  the  19th  of  September,  and  after  a  ter 
rible  assault,  continued  through  two  days,  and 
against  almost  insurmountable  obstacles  both 
of  nature  and  art,  made  himself  master  of  that 
stronghold.  A  division  of  nearly  three  thou 
sand  men  under  General  Wool,  left  San  Anto 
nio  de  Bexar  about  the  last  of  September  for 
the  conquest  of  Coahuila  and  Chihuahua. 
They  entered  Monclova  on  the  31st  of  October 
without  bloodshed.  General  Taylor's  advanc 
ed  position  was  found  to  command  the  depart 
ment  of  Chihuahua,  and  it  was  deemed  advi 
sable  to  concentrate  the  different  columns. 
General  Wool's  command  was  therefore  divert 
ed  from  its  original  destination,  and  moving 
southward,  established  a  communication  with 
General  Taylor  at  Parr  as,  the  latter  at  the 
same  time  occupying  Saltillo  with  a  part  of  his 
forces. 

General  Kearney  having  been  ordered  to 
march  to  the  conquest  of  New  Mexico  and  Cal 
ifornia,  left  Fort  Leaven  worth  on  the  30th  of 
Juae,  OIL  that  distant  expedition.  He  reached 


MEXICAN  WAR.  H7 


Santa  Fe  on  the  18th  of  August,  after  a  march 
of  nearly  nine  hundred  miles,  and  took  posses 
sion  of  the  country  in  the  name  of  the  United 
States,  almost  without  a  show  of  resistance. 
With  about  three  hundred  dragoons  he  then 
commenced  his  long  march  to  the  settled  dis 
tricts  of  California.  Before  leaving  the  valley 
of  the  Rio  Grande,  however,  he  was  met  by 
an  express  from  Colonel  Fremont  of  such  a 
nature  that  he  determined  to  send  back  a  part 
of  his  force,  and  selecting  only  one  hundred 
men  to  accompany  him,  continued  on  his  route. 
On  his  arrival  he  found  all  that  vast  country 
in  the  quiet  possession  of  the  Americans,  its 
conquest  having  been  already  completed  by 
Commodore  Stockton  and  Colonel  Fremont. 

A  company  of  regular  artillery  was  sent  by 
sea  in  August  to  Monterey  upon  the  Pacific, 
and  these  were  followed  in  the  next  month  by 
a  regiment  of  volunteers  "  persons  of  various 
pursuits,"  raised  in  New- York  city  and  its 
neighborhood,  for  the  express  purpose  of  set 
tling  in  California  after  they  should  have  com 
pleted  its  conquest.  These  never  returned. 
This  plan  of  colonizing  with  soldiers  the  terri 
tory  to  be  acquired  by  conquest  was  conceived 


118  REVIEW  OF  THE 

"by  government  among  the  earliest  plans  of  the 
war,  and  was  communicated  to  the  commander 
of  the  expedition  within  two  months  after  the 
first  blow  had  been  struck  on  the  Rio  Grande. 
About  nineteen-twentieths  of  these  conquests 
were  unoccupied  land.  The  instructions  given 
to  the  commanding  officers  were  that  the  coun 
try  was  "  not  to  be  surrendered  in  any  event, 
or  under  any  contingency."  Commodore  Sloat, 
who  at  that  time  commanded  our  squadron  in 
the  Pacific,  says  in  his  general  order  of  July 
Yth,  1846  :  "  It  is  not  only  our  duty  to  take 
California,  but  to  preserve  it  afterwards  as  a 
part  of  the  United  States  at  all  hazards." 
The  secretary  of  war,  in  his  instructions  to 
General  Kearney,  says  :  "  It  is  known  that  a 
large  body  of  Mormon  emigrants  are  en  route 
for  California,  for  the  purpose  of  settling  in 
that  country.  You  are  desired  to  use  all  pro 
per  means  to  have  a  good  understanding  with 
them,  to  the  end  that  the  United  States  may 
have  their  co-operation  in  taking  possession  of 
and  holding  that  country."  In  August,  the 
officer  in  command  of  our  naval  force  in  the 
Pacific,  is  ordered  "to  take,  if  not  already 
done,  immediate  possession  of  Upper  Califor- 


MEXICAN  WAR, 


nia,  so  that  If  the  treaty  of  peace  should  be 
made  on  the  basis  of  the  uti possidetis,  it  may 
leave  California  to  the  United  States."  The 
same  month,  Commodore  Stockton  made  a 
proclamation  to  the  people  scattered  over  that 
great  region,  that  "the  territory  of  California 
now  belongs  to  the  United  States."  A  few 
days  after,  he  writes  to  the  government : 
"  This  rich  and  beautiful  country  belongs  to 
the  United  States,  and  is  forever  free  from 
Mexican  dominion."  In  these  provinces  the 
conquerors  proceeded  to  establish  civil  gov 
ernments,  and  the  inhabitants  were  required 
to  take  the  oath  of  allegiance  to  the  United 
States.  In  his  message  of  December,  1846, 
the  president  says :  "  It  may  be  proper  to 
provide  for  the  security  of  these  important 
conquests,  by  making  an  adequate  appropria 
tion  for  the  purpose  of  erecting  fortifications, 
and  for  the  maintenance  of  our  possession 
and  authority  over  them ;"  and  in  the  same 
paper  he  felicitates  the  American  people  on 
"the  vast  extension  of  our  territorial  limits." 
It  is  certain  that  the  attention  and  exertions 
of  our  government  were  thus  far  exclusively  di 
rected  to  the  conquest  and  permanent  possession 


120  REVIEW  OF  THE 

of  Upper  California  and  New  Mexico,  and  to  the 
military  occupation  of  Tamanlipas,  New  Leon, 
Coahuila  and  Chihuahua,  to  be  held,  as  was 
afterwards  avowed,  as  a  means  of  compelling 
the  surrender  of  the  former. 

We  shall  now  examine  the  second  act  of  the 
war,  or  the  summary  way  of  compelling  a 
cession  of  these  territories. 

In  July,  soon  after  the  opening  of  the  war, 
an  offer  of  negotiation  was  made  by  the  presi 
dent.  As  this  was  not  accepted,  we  do  not 
know  what  its  basis  would  have  been.  In  Jan 
uary  following,  the  offer  was  renewed  and  ac 
cepted  by  Mexico,  on  the  condition  that  our 
forces  should  first  evacuate  her  territory.  This 
condition  was  pronounced  wholly  inadmissible, 
and  that  attempt  also  failed.  That  the  acqui 
sition  of  this  identical  territory  was  the  sole 
object  of  the  war  at  that  time  is  shown  by  the 
following  circumstance.  In  January,  1847,  a 
bill  was  introduced  into  congress,  and  which 
was  finally  passed  on  the  last  day  of  the  session, 
appropriating  three  millions  of  dollars,  for  the 
purpose  of  enabling  the  president  to  conclude  a 
treaty  of  peace  with  Mexico.  The  senator  in 
troducing  the  bill  says :  u  The  president  has 


MEXICAN  WAR. 


reason  to  believe,  that  upon  a  certain  advance 
being  made  to  Mexico  to  enable  her  to  pay  her 
expenses,  she  will  be  willing  to  cede  to  us  New 
Mexico  and  California," 

In  the  meantime  General  Taylor,  with  his 
small,  heroic  band  of  about  forty-five  hundred 
men,  had  hurled  back  in  confusion  from  the  hill 
of  Buena  Vista  the  vast  army  of  upwards  of 
twenty  thousand,  that  with  Santa  Anna  at  its 
head  advanced  like  the  billows  of  the  sea  to 
overwhelm  him ;  and  Vera  Cruz,  with  the  re 
nowned  castle  of  San  Juan  d'Ulloa,  had  fallen 
before  the  science  and  bravery  which  had  been 
combined  against  them.  The  president,  mani 
festing  a  desire  and  making  exertions  for  the 
termination  of  the  war,  which,  had  the  inva 
sion  admitted  of  any  excuse,  and  had  the  terms 
of  peace  been  better  than  an  outrage,  would 
have  been  truly  laudable,  appointed  Mr.  Trist, 
in  April  following,  a  commissioner  to  proceed 
to  the  head-quarters  of  the  army,  with  full 
powers  to  negotiate  a  treaty  of  peace,  when 
ever  the  Mexican  government  should  desire  to 
do  so.  He  did  not  reach  the  army  until  after 
the  national  bridge  had  been  triumphantly 
passed,  and  the  brilliant  victory  of  Cerro  Gor- 


122  EBVIEW  OF  THE 


do  had  crowned  our  arms.  The  dispatches 
which  he  bore,  were  not  communicated  to  the 
Mexican  government  until  in  June,  when  our 
army  had  reached  the  populous  and  wealthy 
city  of  Puebla. 

General  Scott,  having  been  reinforced  by 
about  five  thousand  men,  left  his  quarters  in 
that  city  early  in  August,  and  moved  toward 
the  capital.  On  the  19th  and  20th  of  that 
month  he  encountered  the  hosts  of  the  en 
emy  at  Contreras  and  Churubusco,  the  first 
nine  miles  and  the  second  four  miles  distant 
from  the  city  of  Mexico,  achieving  two  deci 
sive  but  costly  victories.  On  the  24th,  an 
armistice  was  concluded  between  the  two  ar 
mies,  to  allow  opportunity  for  negotiation  be 
tween  Mr.  Trist  and  the  Mexican  commission 
ers.  The  former  had  brought  the  plan  of  a 
treaty  with  him  from  Washington.  And  what 
was  this  plan  ?  It  asked  for  no  indemnity  for 
the  expenses  of  the  war,  for  no  satisfaction  for 
the  claims  of  our  citizens,  for  no  atonement  for 
the  indignities  of  which  our  government  had 
complained ;  but  it  asked  Mexico  to  make  out 
to  the  United  States  a  bill  of  sale  of  the  terri 
tory  to  the  Rio  Grande,  New  Mexico  and 


MEXICAN  WAR. 


the  two  Californias,  together  with  the  right  of 
way  across  the  isthmus  of  Tehuantepec,  for 

which  the  United  States  were  to  pay 

dollars,  the  blank  being  left  unfilled.  The 
Mexican  commissioners  reply  to  this  proposal, 
that  Mexico  having  consented  to  surrender 
Texas  to  the  Eio  Grande  to  the  United  States 
for  a  proper  consideration,  the  cause  of  the  war 
has  disappeared,  and  the  war  itself  ought  to 
cease.  In  respect  to  the  other  territories,  "  it 
is  contrary  to  every  idea  of  justice,"  say  they, 
"  to  make  war  upon  a  people,  because  it  refu 
ses  to  sell  territory  which  its  neighbor  wishes 
to  buy."  "Mexico  cannot  sell  her  people 
against  their  will,  and  she  declines  the  propo 
sition."  But  acceptance  of  the  proposition,  or 
war  was  the  only  alternative.  On  the  6th  of 
September,  the  armistice  was  broken  off,  and  the 
war  was  renewed,  to  compel  Mexico  to  part 
with  about  one-third  of  her  territory.  This 
was  followed  on  the  8th,  by  the  battle  of  El  Mo- 
lino  del  Rey  won  by  General  Worth,  with  only 
about  three  thousand  men.  On  the  13th,  af 
ter  a  cannonade  and  bombardment  from  the 
early  morning  of  the  day  before,  the  citadel 
of  Chapulte^ec,  the  last  and  most  impregna- 


124  REVIEW  OK  THE 


ble  defence  beyond  the  walls  of  Mexico,  was 
carried  by  an  assault,  perhaps  the  most  exci 
ting  and  terrible  in  the  history  of  America. 
Driven  by  the  resistless  onset  from  every  low 
er  position,  and  finally  from  the  stronghold  it 
self,  the  Mexican  forces  retreated  along  the 
great  Bel  en  and  San  Cosme  cans  ways  in  confu 
sion  to  the  city.     Our  army  followed  in  eager 
pursuit,  and  when  nightfall  stopped  their  fur 
ther  progress,  they  had  carried  the  batteries  in 
the  suburbs  and  forced  the  gates  of  Belen  and 
San  Cosme.     Early  the  next  morning  the  city 
surrendered  to  General  Scott,  the  federal  gov 
ernment  and  the  army  having  fled  by  night 
from  its  walls.     Thus  after  five  desperate  bat 
tles  in  the  valley  of  Mexico,  with  an  army  of 
only  ten  thousand  men,  General  Scott  entered 
this  most  ancient  city  in  America,  the  seat  of 
the  Azlec  empire,  since  the  days  of  Cortez  the 
splendid  metropolis  of  the  Spanish  vice-royal 
ty  and  now  the  capital  of  the  Mexican  repub 
lic,  on  whose  fortifications  the  highest  military 
science  in  the  world  had  been  ex  austed,  and 
which  was  held  by  an  army  of  more  than  thirty 
thousand  defenders. 

In  October  following,  Mr.  Trist  was  recall- 


MEXICAN  WAR,  125 


ed.  In  December,  1847,  the  president  in  his 
message  to  congress,  says :  "  I  am  satisfied 
that  New  Mexico  and  California  should  never 
be  surrendered."  "  As  Mexico  refuses  all  in 
demnity,  we  should  adopt  measures  to  indem 
nify  ourselves,  by  appropriating  permanently 
a  portion  of  her  territory  ;"  and  he  proposes 
without  further  ceremony,  the  establishment 
of  territorial  governments  over  those  coun 
tries.  He  says:  "To  reject  indemnity  byre- 
fusing  to  accept  a  cession  of  territory,  would 
be  to  wage  war  without  a  purpose  or  a  definite 
object."  "If  we  refuse  this,  we  can  obtain 
nothing  else."  And  what  is  this  for  which  in 
demnity  is  required  ?  Why  first,  for  the  ex 
penses  of  the  war  itself,  and  second,  for  the 
debt  of  Mexico  to  our  citizens,  the  payment  of 
which  had  been  suspended  on  the  annexation 
of  Texas. 

Suppose  a  victorious  government  at  the  close 
of  such  a  war  as  this,  to  meet  its  humbled  ad 
versary  in  negotiation,  and  the  latter  should 
ask :  '  What  are  the  grievances  for  the  re 
dress  of  which  you  have  carried  on  this  con 
test?'  Suppose  that  it  should  answer,  cour 
principal  demand  is  for  indemnity  for  the  ex- 


126  REVIEW  OF  THE 

penses  of  the  war.'  The  conquered  would  re 
ply,  'that  is  of  course  merely  incidental,  but 
you  desire  redress,  we  suppose,  for  the  wrongs 
on  account  of  which  the  war  was  begun.' 
Suppose  it  should  say, '  these  are  the  demands 
of  our  citizens  upon  you,  which  you  ceased  two 
years  before  to  pay  according  to  agreement.' 
'  And  is  it  for  this.'  O  how  would  they  ex 
claim,  i  and  is  it  for  this,  that  you  have  killed 
our  people,  and  ravaged  our  country,  and  im 
poverished  our  government,  and  now  propose 
to  dismember  our  territory  ?  And  can  it  be 
that  you  have  even  no  excuse  but  this,  for  all 
the  evils  you  are  bringing  on  our  land?' 

O  no,  it  was  not  for  this.  We  will  strip  off 
this  veil  of  indemnity  with  a  few  plain  facts, 
and  conquest  will  stand  naked  before  us.  In 
his  message  of  December,  1847,  the  president 
says :  "  As  the  territory  acquired  might  be  of 
greater  value  than  our  just  demands,  our  com 
missioner  was  authorized  to  stipulate  for  the 
payment  of  such  additional  pecuniary  conside 
ration  as  might  be  deemed  reasonable."  It  will 
be  recollected  that  the  extreme  limit  prescrib 
ed  to  Mr.  Slid  ell,  was  twenty-five  millions  of 
dollars  for  the  whole,  including  Lower  Califor- 


MEXICAN  WAR.  127 


nia.  "Our  just  demands,"  as  the  president 
would  estimate  them,  amounted  to  about  eighty 
millions  of  dollars,  and  we  were  to  pay  to 
Mexico  for  the  country,  of  course,  its  excess  in 
value  over  this  sum. 

Mexico  being  entirely  subdued,  her  army 
annihilated,  her  ports,  her  cities,  her  capital  in 
our  hands,  and  her  means  of  resistance  entirely 
at  an  end,  finally  consented  to  our  terms  of 
peace  ;  and  after  long  negotiation  a  treaty  was 
concluded  at  the  city  of  Guadalupe  Hidalgos, 
on  the  2nd  of  February,  1848. 

By  this  treaty,  the  country  to  the  Rio 
Grande,  New  Mexico  and  Upper  California, 
were  ceded  to  the  United  States.  In  conside 
ration  of  this  territory,  the  United  States  con 
tracted  to  pay  to  Mexico  fifteen  millions  of 
dollars,  and  to  discharge  the  latter  from  all  lia 
bility  to  our  citizens,  assuming  herself  the  pay 
ment  of  their  claims.  These  amounted  accord 
ing  to  the  computation  of  the  executive,  to  five 
or  six  millions  more.  Lower  California  may 
be  considered  worth  four  or  five  millions  of 
dollars.  Then  we  gave  for  the  country  the 
largest  price  which  Mr.  Slidell  had  been  au 
thorized  to  offer,  before  a  sword  had  been 


123  REVIEW  OF  THE 


drawn  in  the  contest.  Two-thirds  of  the  ex 
penses  of  the  war  had  been  incurred  since  Mr. 
Trist's  appointment,  and  still  the  smallest  "  in 
demnity"  which  he  was  then  authorized  to  re 
ceive,  was  found  sufficient  at  its  close. 

Now  in  view  of  these  facts,  we  ask  impar 
tial  and  reflecting  men,  what  room  there  caa 
"be  found  to  doubt  that  this  war  was  carried 
on  for  the  sole  object,  and  with  the  undivided 
purpose  of  compelling  Mexico  to  sell  her  ter 
ritory  to  the  United  States ;  that  money  was 
nothing,  blood  was  nothing,  but  the  territory 
must  be  obtained. 

There  is  a  strange  unity  about  the  whole 
transaction,  exhibiting  an  unwavering  fixed 
ness  of  purpose.  In  the  instructions  to  Mr. 
Slidell,  we  see  the  original  conception.  This  is 
followed  by  the  conquest  of  the  territory,  with 
the  determination  first  expressed  in  acts,  and 
then  avowed  in  words  to  keep  it,  Mexico  wil 
ling  or  unwilling.  Connected  with  this  was 
the  military  occupation  of  the  departments  on 
the  Eio  Grande,  "  to  be  held  as  a  means  of  co 
ercing  Mexico  to  just  terms  of  peace."  We 
quote  the  language  of  the  executive.  This  not 
being  sufficient,  our  army  is  sent  through  deso- 


MEXICAN  WAR. 


lation  and  blood  to  her  capital,  to  compel  ac 
quiescence  in  the  identical  bargain  first  conceiv 
ed,  and  inflexibly  insisted  on.  Where  now  is 
"  the  indemnity  for  the  past  and  security  for 
the  future,"  that  thinest  subterfuge,  under 
which  it  was  ever  attempted  to  conceal  a  na 
tional  robbery  ? 

When  not  a  blow  had  been  struck,  when 
ten  millions,  and  when  fifty  millions  of  dollars 
had  been  expended,  when  one  thousand,  and 
when  twenty  thousand  lives  had  been  sacrifi 
ced,  when  it  was  proposed  to  conquer  a  peace, 
and  when  it  was  proposed  to  purchase  a  peace, 
the  same  constant  price  was  offered  for  the 
same  territory,  the  same  unvarying  surrender 
was  demanded. 

The  bargain  and  sale  had  no  connection 
whatever  with  the  war,  except  as  the  latter  was 
the  means  of  compelling  the  former.  The  war 
effected  no  other  object  but  to  extort  from 
Mexico  her  consent  to  this  transaction ;  and 
as  our  government  was  perfectly  satisfied  and 
even  gratified  with  the  result,  announcing  the 
" honorable  peace"  for  which  we  had  fought  to 
be  attained,  we  must  conclude  that  it  proposed 
to  itself  no  other  object.  From  this  alterna- 
5 


130  REVIEW  OF  THE 

tive  there  is  no  escape.  Either  this  war  was 
prosecuted  solely  to  compel  Mexico  to  sell  her 
lands  and  their  inhabitants  at  a  predetermined 
price,  or  else  its  object  remains  as  yet  unat- 
tained.  The  blood  and  treasure  of  our  people 
have  been  poured  out  like  water  either  to  ef 
fect  an  unjust  conquest,  or  for  a  purpose  which 
has  never  yet  been  accomplished. 

We  have  thus  presented  as  briefly  as  possi 
ble,  the  progress  and  objects  of  this  war. 
Commenced  in  unjust  aggression,  it  was  prose 
cuted  even  to  the  end  for  no  other  object,  but 
to  possess  ourselves  of  the  territory  of  another 
republic  against  her  will.  A  robbery  in  its 
inception,  it  maintained  its  character  to  the 
end.  We  are  unable  to  contemplate  without 
indignation  and  shame,  this  most  unjust  war, 
whose  wickedness  the  splendor  of  its  victories 
is  insufficient  to  veil.  Well  and  truly  it  was 
declared  by  a  meeting  of  our  citizens  in  the 
city  of  New- York,  in  1845,  as  they  read  in  the 
political  heavens  the  signs  of  this  remorseless 
purpose  of  our  government,  that  war  with 
Mexico  would  be  "  a  war  for  conquest,  an  un 
just  war,  a  war  in  which  the  nation  would  be 
sustained  by  no  sense  of  right,  but  condemned 


MEXICAN  WAR. 


by  the  unanimous  voice  of  the  civilized  and 
Christian  world." 

We  have  finished  our  review  of  the  causes 
and.  conduct  of  this  wicked  and  unjust  wrong, 
in  which  the  crime  of  our  rulers  involved  our 
country.  We  shall  now  proceed  to  a  view  of 
its  consequences. 


132  REVIEW  OF  THE 


CHAPTEE    XI. 


THE  Benefits  of  the  War  considered.  The  payment  of  the  claims  of 
our  citizens  against  Mexico.  The  acquisition  of  tenitory.  Value  of 
this  conquest  to  the  United  States,  and  to  the  cause  of  freedom. 

LET  us  turn  our  eyes  to  the  benefits  of  this 
conquest.  Some  of  our  citizens  have  cause  for 
satisfaction  at  the  certain  and  speedy  payment 
of  their  claims  against  Mexico.  These  we  sup 
pose  that  the  United  States  might  have  paid  as 
well  without  bloodshed  and  the  waste  of  other 
millions,  as  with  them.  The  only  other  benefits 
which  are  said  to  have  resulted  from  the  war,  so 
far  as  we  have  been  able  to  learn,  have  been  the 
acquisition  of  New  Mexico  and  California,  and 
the  left  bank  of  the  Rio  Grande.  Executive 
imagination  has  summoned  up  a  mighty  nation 
on  their  hills,  and  in  their  valleys.  We  have 
seen  in  printed  vision  its  waters  white  with  the 
wings  of  commerce,  and  its  fields  laden  with 


MEXICAN  WAR.  133 


the  fruits  of  plenty — a  new  home  opened  to 
mankind,  to  freedom  and  to  civilization — and 
all  this  by  means  of  the  Mexican  war.  This, 
the  nation  has  been  solemnly  informed,  consti 
tutes  indemnity  for  the  past.* 

We  have  no  disposition  to  doubt  the  truth 
of  this  prophecy.  We  hope  and  believe  that 
some  generation  not  far  distant  will  witness 
its  fulfillment.  But  another  question  presents 
itself,  which  is  of  considerable  consequence  in 
this  connexion,  and  to  which  we  are  by  no 
means  so  ready  to  yield  our  assent.  Was  the 
Mexican  war  necessary  to  the  attainment  of 
this  result?  For  of  course,  if  it  was  not,  if 
this  consummation  would  have  been  reached  as 
well  without  the  war,  it  cannot  be  regarded  as 
its  consequence,  and  constitutes  no  "indemnity 
for  the  past." 

We  do  not  believe  that  there  is  an  individ 
ual,  who  in  the  exercise  of  a  sober  and  intelli 
gent  judgment,  will  say  that  the  Mexican  war 
was  necessary  in  order  to  plant  freedom  on  the 
shores  of  the  Pacific,  or  in  the  valleys  of  New 
Mexico.  The  occupation  of  those  countries 


*  President's  answer  to  a  resolution  of  the  house  of  representatives. 
Congressional  Globe  1847-8,  page  990. 


134  REVIEW  OF  THE 


by  a  race  of  freemen,  would  under  any  cir 
cumstances  have  been  inevitable.  There  did 
not  exist  before  the  war  any  reason  to  doubt 
such  a  result.  We  are  familiar  with  the  ad 
vance  of  our  own  race  in  these  United  States. 
Seventy  years  ago  the  Alleghanies  were  our 
western  wall. 

There  is  no  conquest  like  that  of  the  plow. 
The  spoils  of  battle  pass  away  generally  with 
its  victors,  sometimes  with  its  victims.  But 
when  the  civilized  and  civilizing  emigrant 
plants  himself  in  a  new  country,  its  destiny  is, 
in  most  instances,  fixed  forever.  The  tree  of 
civilization  roots  itself  deep  in  the  soil,  and  in 
its  turn  bears  fruit,  and  scatters  its  seed  be 
yond. 

The  principle  of  democracy  is  the  promi 
nent  feature  in. the  character  of  this  race.  It 
has  become  an  element  of  thought  in  the  minds 
of  men.  It  is  not  possible  that  a  state  should 
arise  on  our  western  coasts,  which  would  not 
be  governed  according  to  the  will  of  its  inhab 
itants.  There  is  no  one  who  has  seen  the  broad 
river  of  emigration  sweep  away  the  forest  and 
its  kings,  who  can  say  that  when  it  has  flowed 
on  to  the  shores  of  the  Pacific,  its  waters  will 


MEXICAN  WAR. 


be  less  pure  and  fertilizing  than  they  are  to 
day. 

It  is  said,  however,  that  without  this  war  the 
United  States  might  never  have  obtained  pos 
session  of  that  country,  that  even  if  it  had  be 
come  a  home  of  freedom,  another  nation  might 
have  arisen  there.  We  confess  that  we  should 
rejoice  at  the  prospect  of  such  a  result.  Such 
vast  possessions  are  of  no  benefit  to  us  as  a  na 
tion.  And  on  the  other  hand,  if  the  rights  of 
man  were  sure  hereafter  to  be  maintained  in 
any  event  on  those  distant  shores,  as  fully  at 
least  as  they  are  here,  of  what  consequence 
would  it  be  to  the  citizens  of  those  future 
states  to  be  united  under  our  particular  organi 
zation.  Some  spirit  other  than  the  unselfish 
desire  to  extend  the  area  of  freedom  must 
surely  have  prompted  to  this  acquisition. 

The  day  is  passing  away  we  trust,  in  which 
nations  seek  their  gain  in  each  other's  loss. 
Who  can  doubt  that  a  sister  republic  in  that 
distant  region,  knit  to  us  by  blood  and  by  so 
cial  and  political  fellowship,  would  be  so  also 
by  the  bonds  of  peace  and  national  attach 
ment?  Who  can  doubt  that  harmony  and 
friendship  would  be  borne  from  one  to  another 


136  REVIEW  OF  THE 

on  the  currents  of  their  waters,  that  the  iron 
hands  which  would  unite  their  cities  would 
bind  their  hearts  to  each  other  also,  and  that 
sympathies  and  thoughts  would  dart  together 
over  the  network  of  their  electric  nerves  ? 
Who  can  doubt  that  while  each  would  pursue 
its  own  domestic  policy,  a  noble  confidence 
and  generosity  would  mark  their  intercourse, 
rejoicing  in  each  other's  welfare,  and  seeking 
each  other's  good. 

But  we  can  no  more  pretend  to  have  attain 
ed  to  social  and  political  than  to  individual 
perfection.  Many  are  conscious  that  we  are  as 
yet  very  far  from  that  end,  and  that  our  institu 
tions,  though  the  best  undoubtedly  that  the 
world  has  ever  seen,  are  but  the  imperfect 
work  of  imperfect  beings.  We  can  hardly 
suppose  that  the  freemen  of  that  region,  with 
the  light  of  our  experience  to  guide  them, 
would  fail  to  improve  upon  our  example.  We 
say  then,  that  if  the  acquisition  of  this  terri 
tory  is  the  only  benefit  attributable  to  the 
Mexican  war,  it  has  been  productive  of  no  good 
whatever. 

But  if  this  war  was  wrong  in  its  beginning 
and  continuance,  the  most  splendid  results,  the 


MEXICAN  WAR.  137 


greatest  blessings  following  in  its  train  would 
not  change  its  character  in  the  least.  Though 
its  effect  had  been  to  consecrate  that  region  to 
freedom,  and  though  without  its  agency,  as  far 
as  human  understanding  can  discover,  it  would 
have  been  doomed  to  despotism,  these  conse 
quences  would  afford  no  extenuation  of  its 
criminality.  As  we  read  in  all  the  events  of 
history  that  there  is  a  power  above  us,  who, 
by  an  ordained  and  inevitable  chain  of  causes 
and  effects  punishes  national  sins  by  national 
calamities,  how  can  we  dare  to  hope,  that  we 
or  our  children  shall  enjoy  that  of  which  we 
have  despoiled  another  ?  How  can  we  expect 
but  that  this  ill  gotten  possession  will  prove  a 
curse  to  embitter  our  peace  and  to  sap  the 
foundations  of  our  national  prosperity. 


138  REVIEW  OF  THE 


CHAPTER    XII. 


THE  Evils  attending  the  War.     Its   Expense.     Its  Loss  of  Life — in 
battle — by  disease. 

WE  have  viewed  the  meager  credit  of  this 
war ;  let  us  now  examine  its  debtor  side  in  its 
account  with  humanity. 

It  is  estimated  that  the  war  will  have  cost 
the  United  States,  including  the  price  paid  for 
the  ceded  territory  and  when  arrears  are  liqui 
dated  and  pensions  fully  paid,  at  least  one  hun 
dred  millions  of  dollars.  This  is  so  much  capi 
tal  which  has  been  accumulated  by  the  indus 
try  and  enterprize  of  the  citizens  of  the  Uni 
ted  States  almost  entirely  destroyed,  as  if  it 
had  been  consumed  in  some  vast  conflagration. 
"We  say  almost,  because  some  part  yet  remains 
in  permanent  articles,  useless  however  except 
for  other  wars,  and  some  in  the  profits  of  con 
tractors  ;  but  this  amount  is  comparatively 


MEXICAN  WAR.  139 


very  small.  It  is  difficult  for  the  mind  to  form 
an  idea  of  so  large  a  sum.  According  to  Mr. 
Gallatin,  it  is  equal  to  the  aggregate  value  of 
all  the  buildings  in  the  city  of  New- York,  ex 
cluding  the  nominal  value  of  the  lots.  The 
entire  population  of  the  United  States  is  now 
about  twenty  millions.  The  sum  thus  wasted 
is  then  five  dollars  taken  from  every  man,  wo 
man  and  child  in  the  country.  The  number 
of  voters  in  the  United  States  does  not  vary 
much  from  three  millions.  This  wickedness 
then  has  taken  over  thirty- three  dollars  from 
every  voter  in  the  land  and  destroyed  it. 

This  sum  judiciously  expended  would  have 
made  the  most  perfect  and  durable  improve 
ments  in  every  river  and  harbor  throughout 
the  country ;  the  blessing  of  which  to  com 
merce,  and  to  large  classes  of  our  fellow  citi 
zens  whose  lives  and  property  are  exposed  on 
our  inland  waters,  it  is  not  possible  to  estimate. 
A  tenth  part  of  this  amount  expended  in  the 
cause  of  science  would  have  been  a  self-re 
warding  munificence,  which  spendthrifts  are 
always  too  poor  to  exercise. 

This  sum  would  have  established  two  hun 
dred  institutions  of  learning  in  the  United 


140  REVIEW  OF  THE 


States,  with  endowments  of  half  a  million  of 
dollars  each,  or  four  hundred  with  endowments 
of  a  quarter  of  a  million  each,  sufficient  to 
have  furnished  the  best  education,  that  noblest 
gift  of  one  generation  to  another,  gratuitously 
to  two  hundred  thousand  youth  of  our  coun 
try  every  year  forever.  It  was  demonstrated 
in  the  senate  of  the  United  States,  that  one 
half  of  the  expenses  of  this  war,  if  invested  in 
six  per  cent  stocks,  and  the  interest  arising 
from  it  applied  to  the  carrying  out  of  a  gradual 
and  feasible  system  of  colonization,  would  in 
fifty  years  exterminate  the  curse  of  negro 
slavery  from  our  soil. 

The  wealth  of  the  United  States  has  been 
created  almost  entirely  by  the  labor  and  enter- 
prize  of  their  citizens.  The  rapid  increase  and 
diffusion  of  our  people  have  required  that  the 
capital  which  they  have  created  should  be  con 
verted  into  many  other  forms  of  more  imme 
diate  necessity  than  money ;  as  for  instance, 
into  buildings  and  the  varied  instruments  of 
production.  These  wants  of  a  state  must  be 
first  supplied,  before  its  circulating  and  availa 
ble  wealth  can  become  abundant.  In  our  more 
newly  settled  states,  the  wealth  of  the  citizens 


MEXICAN  WAR. 


consists  almost  entirely  in  their  farms  and 
stock,  houses  and  shops  and  tools  and  imple 
ments,  while  money  is  often  hardly  to  be  found. 
In  the  older  parts  of  the  country  the  case  is 
different  to  a  great  extent,  but  even  in  our 
'great  mercantile  cities  the  amount  of  circula 
ting  capital  is  no  more  than  is  necessary  for  the 
ordinary  transaction  of  business.  Wealth 
does  not  lie  idle  and  unproductive,  seeking  in 
vain  for  investment ;  but  all  is  needed  and  em 
ployed  in  the  growing  commercial  and  manu 
facturing  transactions  of  the  country.  Gov 
ernment  loans  have  been  taken  mostly  in  this 
country,  and  it  is  from  this  circulating  capital 
exclusively  that  this  vast  amount  has  been 
drawn ;  and  this  in  addition  to  the  sum  neces 
sary  for  the  regular  administration  of  the  gov 
ernment.  Although  foreign  causes  of  an  un 
happy  nature  contributed  to  make  this  exaction 
less  severely  felt  at  first  than  it  would  have  been 
under  ordinary  circumstances,  still  every  de 
partment  of  business  throughout  our  country 
has  been  crippled,  and  has  endured  a  needless 
suffering  for  the  want  of  money.  This  fact  is 
best  evidenced  to  those  who  are  not  familiar 
with  commercial  and  manufacturing  operations, 


142  REVIEW  OF  THE 


by  the  enormous  rates  of  interest  which  capi 
tal  commanded  for  a  long  time  during  and  af 
ter  the  war,  even  in  our  commercial  cities, 
reaching  often  from  twelve  to  eighteen  per  cent, 
on  long  loans,  and  sometimes  to  three  and  even 
four  per  cent,  a  month  on  shorter  time.  It  is 
trueth  at  the  unexampled  energy  of  our  people 
is  rapidly  recovering  from  the  blow,  and  re 
producing  their  wasted  capital.  But  the 
wrong  to  them  does  not  depend  on  their  ability 
to  recover  from  its  eifects. 

The  capital  thus  squandered  is  by  far  the 
smallest  part  of  the  pecuniary  loss  which  this 
war  has  occasioned  to  our  country.  Upwards 
of  one  hundred  thousand  men  were  employed 
in  various  capacities  in  its  prosecution.  Sup 
posing  that  each  of  these  lost  on  the  average,  a 
year  and  a  half,  the  value  of  their  labor  du 
ring  that  time  reckoned  at  seventy-five  cents 
a  day,  would  have  been  thirty-three  million 
dollars.  If  we  lost,  as  we  doubtless  did,  thirty 
thousand  lives,  and  each  life  was  shortened 
twenty  years,  this  would  make  at  the  same  rate 
a  loss  of  one  hundred  and  forty  million  dol 
lars.  And  here  we  have  a  loss  of  more  than  one 
hundred  and  seventy  Trillion  dollars  in  produo 


MEXICAN  WAR.  143 


tive  labor  alone  by  the  war.  Thus  this  wrong 
has  prevented  the  production  of  this  vast 
amount  of  wealth,  which  our  country  would 
otherwise  have  corne  to  possess. 

We  have  resting  upon  us  also  an  enormous 
public  debt.  On  this  the  interest  must  be  paid 
annually,  and  it  will  be  the  duty  of  govern 
ment  to  extinguish  the  principal  as  rapidly  as 
possible.  To  effect  this  it  is  probable  that  it 
will  become  necessary  to  impose  duties  on 
some  articles  now  generally  esteemed  necessa 
ries  of  life,  and  to  increase  those  already  laid 
on  others,  and  that  for  many  years  public  un 
dertakings  of  vital  importance  to  many  por 
tions  of  our  citizens  and  of  interest  to  all,  will 
necessarily  be  suspended. 

But  the  destruction  of  the  wealth,  the  injury 
to  the  production  and  the  neglect  of  the  peace 
ful  interests  of  our  country,  are  the  least  of 
the  evils  resulting  from  this  conquest.  There 
were  fought  during  the  war  about  thirty  bat 
tles  attended  with  great  suffering  and  loss  of 
life.  This  to  our  troops  however,  was  but  light 
indeed  compared  with  the  frightful  ravages  of 
disease.  One  of  the  Indiana  regiments  which 
left  its  native  state  a  thousand  strong,  and 


144  REVIEW  OF  THE 


which  never  saw  a  battle,  returned  at  the  close 
of  the  war  with  less  than  four  hundred  in  its 
wasted  ranks.  When  General  Childs  took 
command  of  the  garrison  at  Jalapa,  eighteen 
hundred  men  lay  sick  in  our  hospitals  in  that 
city.  At  the  city  of  Mexico,  the  deaths  among 
our  troops  were  much  of  the  time  one  thousand 
monthly.  On  a  parade  when  a  certain  com 
pany  was  called  which  had  numbered  over  one 
hundred  men,  a  single  private  answered  to  the 
call,  its  sole  living  representative.  Around 
the  castle  of  Perote  alone,  are  three  thousand 
graves  of  soldiers  who  perished  by  disease. 
They  lie  in  that  great  burial  place.  Some  in 
the  excitement  of  battle  fell  instantly  dead  by 
some  almost  unfelt  blow  ;  others  perished  UD- 
der  a  multitude  of  wounds ;  others  still  expir 
ed  after  hours,  or  days,  or  weeks  of  agonizing 
torment.  Many  thousands  thirsting  for  dis 
tinction,  who  had  left  their  homes  with  high 
hopes  of  glory  on  the  battle  field,  sunk  under 
the  malignant  pestilence,  while  thousands  more 
dragged  home  their  disfigured  bodies,  or  re 
turned  to  carry  with  them  through  life  shat 
tered  constitutions  and  disease,  or  to  hasten  to 
their  graves. 


MEXICAN  WAR.  145 


If  there  is  a  time  above  all  others  when  the 
heart  yearns  for  the  presence  of  affection,  when 
its  voice  falls  like  music  on  the  ear,  when  the 
tender  ministry  of  those  we  love  is  felt  to  be 
O  !,  how  precious,  and  when  its  absence  wrings 
the  heart  with  the  bitter  pang  of  desolation, 
it  is  when  we  lie  on  the  bed  of  suffering  and 
feel  the  approach  of  death. 

While  we  mourn  for  our  own  countrymen 
who  fell  victims  to  conquest,  let  us  not  forget 
those  who  fought  against  us,  sacrificed  by  our 
wickedness.  Even  defenceless  women  and 
children  did  not  always  escape  the  horrors  of 
the  war.  At  the  storming  of  Monterey,  a  young 
Mexican  girl  was  seen  carrying  water  to  the 
wounded  of  both  armies.  The  battle  thicken 
ed  around  her,  but  with  a  heroic  devotion  she 
continued  her  pious  ministry.  As  she  hasten 
ed  from  one  to  another,  binding  up  their 
wounds  and  allaying  their  intolerable  thirst, 
she  seemed  some  angel  of  mercy  amid  the 
scene  of  carnage,  when  a  cannon  ball  snatched 
away  her  gentle  spirit,  and  her  life-blood  flow 
ed  mingling  with  the  water  she  had  brought. 

But  who  shall  paint  the  agony  of  those  who 
mourn  a  son,  a  father,  a  husband,  a  brother 
5* 


146  BE  VIEW  OF  THE 

wlio  can  never  return  ?  To  how  many  did  the 
news  of  peace  bring  a  joyful  anticipation, 
doomed  to  darken  into  disappointment  and 
despair.  Where  is  the  indemnity  that  shall 
atone  for  crushed  affections  ?  What  price  can 
pay  for  the  lost  treasures  of  the  heart  ?  It  is 
a  terrible  responsibility  to  have  added  a  mite 
to  human  suffering.  By  what  great  necessity 
can  this  war  be  justified  ? 


MEXICAN  WAR. 


147 


CHAPTEE    XIII. 


THE  Duty  of  the  United  States  toward  other  nations  enhanced  by  her 
position.  Her  duty  to  Mexico  in  particular.  These  duties  violated 
by  this  War. 

WE  shall  now  examine  the  duty  and  true 
ambition  and  glory  of  the  United  States,  and 
show  the  consequences  of  this  violation  of 
that  duty  upon  the  character  of  our  peo 
ple,  and  on  the  cause  of  religion  and  of  free 
dom  in  our  own  land,  and  throughout  the 
world . 

It  is  a  matter  of  doubt  among  many,  wheth 
er  impartial  justice  ought  ever  to  be  expected 
from  a  state,  seeking  its  own  interest  and  ame 
nable  to  no  law  This  doubt  appears  well 
warranted  by  history,  but  no  sound  distinction 
can  be  drawn  in  morals  between  public  and 
private  obligation.  A  state  is  an  ideal  being. 
It  does  not  act,  it  possesses  no  responsibility. 
It  exists  only  in  contemplation.  What  are 


148  REVIEW  OF  THE 


commonly  called  acts  of  the  state  are  the  acts 
of  individuals. 

The  law  of  right  and  wrong  is  the  ultima 
ratio  of  human  action.  It  is  the  duty  of  man 
to  do  whatever  the  moral  law  declares  to  be 
right,  and  to  refrain  from  doing  what  it  de 
clares  to  be  wrong ;  and  this  for  the  single  rea 
son  that  one  is  right  and  the  other  wrong. 
To  whatever  office  in  the  vast  machinery  of 
government  a  man  may  be  called,  whether  it 
be  to  legislate  or  to  administer  the  laws,  he  is 
bound  to  obey  in  that,  as  in  every  other  situa 
tion,  the  same  law  of  right.  An  individual  ac 
countability  inseparable  from  his  existence 
rests  upon  him  still. 

Is  one  a  legislator,  and  through  prejudice  or 
passion  or  excitement,  fails  to  raise  his  voice 
against  injustice  and  wrong,  or  seeks  not  with 
an  enlarged  humanity  the  welfare  of  his  race ; 
is  he  a  minister,  and  do  selfishness  and  ambition 
mark  his  counsels ;  does  he  n>ld  the  highest 
authority  of  the  land  and  direct  in  any  re 
spect  the  conduct  of  his  country,  and  is  not 
the  good  of  all  mankind  his  supreme  desire — do 
not  justice,  mercy  and  peace  guide  his  steps — 
does  resentment  ever  drive  away  forgiveness 


MEXICAN  WAR.  149 


from  him ;  is  lie  a  private  citizen  living  in  a 
land  of  individual  influence,  and  has  he  ever 
raised  his  voice  to  require  or  approve  at  the 
hands  of  his  government  any  but  just  and  gen 
erous  measures,  his  is  the  individual  wrong. 

There  is  not  one  law  of  duty  to  govern  the 
conduct  of  men  in  private  and  another  in  pub 
lic  relations.  There  is  no  such  thing  as  collec 
tive  responsibility. 

There  are,  moreover,  many  things  which  in 
crease  the  responsibility  of  those  engaged  in 
the  direction  of  public  affairs.  The  wrongs 
which  men  commit  in  an  official  capacity  ad 
mit  often  of  no  redress.  There  exists  no  pow 
er  to  enforce  in  legislatures  or  sovereigns  obe 
dience  to  justice.  Their  acts  become,  also, 
justifying  precedents  to  those  who  follow  them ; 
for  men  too  often  derive  their  notions  of  right 
from  wrongs  which  time  has  rendered  venera 
ble.  They  possess,  besides,  far  larger  opportu 
nity  of  promoting  the  good,  or  increasing  the 
misery  of  mankind.  The  consequences  of 
their  actions  must  be  immeasurably  greater 
than  can  follow  those  of  any  private  citizen. 

Governments   sustain   a   twofold  relation. 
They  stand  in  the  position   of   individuals 


150  REVIEW  OF  THE 

among  other  governments,  and  hence  arise  the 
same  duties  which  devolve  upon  man  in  his  in 
tercourse  with  his  fellow  man.  They  are  also 
the  constituted  protectors  of  their  people,  the 
guardianship  of  whose  rights  and  interests  is 
committed  to  their  care. 

Revelation  supplying  the  imperfect  teachings 
of  conscience,  presents  to  us  its  simple  and 
sublime  precepts,  to  govern  the  conduct  of  na 
tion  with  nation,  as  well  as  that  of  man  with 
man. 

The  institutions  and  precepts  of  men  bear 
within  them  the  evidence  of  their  own  falli 
bility  and  of  the  imperfection  of  their  authors. 
Every  race  and  every  age  is  governed  by  those 
peculiar  to  itself,  and  often  differing  from  each 
other  as  widely  as  do  the  habits  and  characters 
of  men.  The  laws  of  one  people  are  unconge 
nial  with  the  dispositions,  and  unadapted  to 
the  wants  of  another.  They  change,  moreo 
ver,  with  every  passing  generation.  While 
they  operate  to  mould  society  to  some  extent, 
they  themselves  in  turn  are  moulded  by  it. 
The  institutions  and  customs  of  one  age  are 
often  too  barbarous  or  too  refined  to  suit  the 
succeeding  one.  The  laws  of  our  fathers,  so 


MEXICAN  WAR. 


far  as  they  are  merely  the  work  of  the  human 
intellect,  become  obsolete,  and  pass  away  with 
the  state  of  society  out  of  which  they  grew, 
and  to  which  they  were  adapted  ;  giving  place 
to  others,  which  at  some  future  day  perhaps 
will  themselves  be  sought  for  only  by  the  cu 
rious.  The  teachings  of  Christianity  when 
placed  side  by  side  with  these,  present  a  re 
markable  contrast.  So  simple  that  the  mind 
of  a  child  can  comprehend  it,  so  profound 
that  the  sage  is  never  satisfied  with  its  contem 
plation,  applying  to  the  minutest  act,  embra 
cing  in  its  comprehension  all  the  affairs  in 
which  men  can  engage,  adapted  alike  to  every 
age  of  time,  and  to  every  circumstance  and 
condition  of  man,  the  source  of  all  that  is  good 
or  durable  in  human  institutions,  so  suited  to 
the  nature  of  our  being,  that  happiness  follows 
our  obedience,  and  unhappiness  our  disobedi 
ence  to  its  every  dictate,  the  moral  law  stands 
alone,  perfect  and  eternal,  a  part  of  the  great 
unity  of  being,  and  revealing  in  its  author  the 
same  infinite  One  who  fashioned  the  nature  and 
the  soul  of  man. 

This  law  must  possess  supreme  authority 
over  nations  as  well  as  individuals,  and  all  hu- 


152  REVIEW  OF  THE 

man  institutions  should  be  founded  upon  it. 
The  laws  of  nations  are  conventional.  Obedi 
ence  to  them  is  entirely  voluntary.  Their  au 
thority  should  most  of  all,  for  this  reason,  be 
tested  by  the  principles  of  the  moral  laA7,  and 
usages  should  be  disregarded,  however  sanc 
tioned  by  authority  or  hallowed  by  age,  which 
are  not  in  conformity  with  its  spirit. 

It  would  be  a  work  of  supererogation  to  en 
ter  further  into  an  examination  of  the  princi 
ples  which  should  govern  the  conduct  of  na 
tions  generally.  These  need  only  to  be  stated. 
The  mind  assents  to  them  instinctively.  They 
are  moral  axioms. 

We  shall  in  the  following  observations  con 
fine  our  view  to  the  United  States,  and  show 
how  their  obligations  are  heightened  by  their 
peculiar  position. 

We  stand  upon  a  political  and  moral  emi 
nence.  Our  government  is  undoubtedly  the 
greatest  and  most  prosperous  republic  that  has 
ever  existed,  and  we  have  attained  a  high  rank 
among  enlightened  and  virtuous  nations.  We 
are  as  it  were,  pioneers  in  political  freedom 
and  in  individual  elevation  ;  and  we  have  ac 
quired  an  influence  in  the  affairs  of  the  world 


MEXICAN  WAR.  153 


and  over  the  thoughts  of  men,  unprecedented 
in  so  brief  a  period.  We  are  moreover  re 
moved  beyond  the  entanglements  of  European 
politics,  are  unfettered  by  the  precedents  and 
usages  by  which  the  action  of  those  states  is 
so  greatly  controlled,  and  are  but  little  effected 
either  by  their  struggles  or  their  diplomacy. 
"We  have  no  reasons  of  state  opposed  to  the 
dictates  of  morality. 

It  would  seem  as  if  we  were  called  upon  by 
the  possession  of  many  advantages  denied  in 
the  same  degree  to  others,  to  exalt  the  stand 
ard  of  national  morality.  It  would  appear 
that  we  should  not  be  contented  in  our  inter 
course  with  other  nations  to  follow  the  princi 
ples  by  which  monarchies  were  guided  in  a  ru 
der  age,  to  pay  our  blind  homage  to  usages 
originating  in,  and  adapted  to  a  less  enlighten 
ed  time,  and  to  aim  only  to  square  our  conduct 
with  these  imperfect  standards.  "  We  have 
been  raised  up,"  says  a  distinguished  states 
man,  "for  high  and  noble  purposes."  We 
should  seek  to  realize  and  to  accomplish  our 
mission. 

Justice  does  not  consist  merely  in  conformi 
ty  with  the  usages,  or  obedience  to  the  regula- 


154  REVIEW  OF  THE 

tions  of  society.  He  whose  highest  principle 
is  to  drive  no  closer  a  bargain  with  his  neigh 
bor  than  is  tolerated  by  the  laws,  is  among  the 
most  contemptible  of  men.  We  should  strive 
in  our  intercourse  with  other  nations,  to  be  ac 
tuated  by  a  love  of  right  and  by  a  noble  gen 
erosity  ;  to  have  our  actions  inspired,  as  it  were, 
with  the  spirit  of  equity.  "  Although  the 
hazard  of  transient  losses,"  said  a  late  pure 
minded  statesman,  "  may  be  incurred  by  a 
rigid  adherence  to  just  principles,  no  lasting 
prosperity  can  be  secured  when  they  are  disre 
garded."  It  is  so  difficult  for  nations  to  be 
just,  their  actions  are  so  entirely  beyond  con 
trol,  and  such  is  the  blinding  influence  of  in 
terest,  that  we  should  set  our  standard  of  na 
tional  conduct  peculiarly  high,  conscious  of  the 
obstacles  in  the  way  of  its  attainment. 

Nearly  a  century  before  the  multitude  in 
Gallilee  listened  to  the  sermon  on  the  mount, 
the  Roman  orator  uttered  the  sentiment 
which  we  have  placed  at  the  head  of  this  es 
say.  The  most  virtuous  character  of  antiquity, 
his  writings  contain  perhaps  the  noblest  unin 
spired  precepts  which  were  ever  taught  to 
man. 


MEXICAN  WAR.  J55 


"  Not  only,"  lie  says,  "  is  that  declaration  un 
true  which  asserts  that  no  republic  can  be  gov 
erned  without  injustice,  but  this  is  most  true, 
that  without  the  highest  justice  no  republic 
can  be  guided  to  permanent  prosperity."  The 
word  " justitia"  is  very  comprehensive  and 
cannot  be  rendered  into  English  by  any  single 
expression.  It  embraces  the  several  ideas  of 
clemency,  humanity  and  magnanimity,  the  very 
spirit  of  justice. 

These  words  possess  weighty  import  and 
solemn  association.  They  were  prophetic  of 
the  downfall  of  Rome.  They  come  to  us  with 
awful  warning  from  the  portals  of  the  tomb  in 
which  her  liberties  were  buried. 

"The  mission  of  the  United  States,"  says 
one  of  their  best  citizens,  "  is  one  of  peace,  of 
love  and  of  good  will  to  men."  To  elevate 
the  human  race,  by  exalting  the  standard  of 
individual  intelligence  and  virtue,  to  still  the 
storms  of  human  passion,  to  inculcate  the  prin 
ciples  of  equality,  fraternity  and  peace  among 
men,  these  should  be  the  objects  of  our  ambi 
tion,  to  set  their  example  before  the  world, 
this  is  our  true  glory.  While  other  nations 
might  boast  of  their  victories,  we  could  then 


156  EBVIEW  OF  THE 

feel  that  we  had  conquered  ignorance,  we  had 
conquered  vice,  we  had  conquered  ourselves. 
There  is  a  glory  purer  than  that  which  is  shroud 
ed  in  the  smoke  of  the  battle-field,  it  illumines 
the  path  of  peace ;  there  is  a  serener  light 
than  beams  from  the  cannon's  mouth,  it  plays 
around  the  head  of  virtue. 

Wars  unhappily  become  sometimes  necessa 
ry.  aThe  most  sacred  regard  for  justice  and 
equity,"  says  Mr.  Calhoun,  "  and  the  most  cau 
tious  policy,  cannot  always  prevent  them." 
Governments  must  sometimes  defend  by  force 
the  rights  of  their  people.  Some  principle 
dearer  than  life  may  be  invaded,  wrongs 
may  be  committed  which  it  would  be  ignoble 
to  suffer  and  which  force  alone  can  prevent. 
Here  the  crime  is  with  the  aggressor.  But 
it  is  a  vast  responsibility  to  determine  up 
on  a  war;  and  justice,  humanity  and  every 
precept  of  religion  teach  us,  that  it  should  only 
be  done  under  a  controlling  necessity,  and  when 
every  other  means  of  security  have  been  ex 
hausted  in  vain. 

Mexico  is  our  sister  republic.  She  has  been 
aspiring  to  emulate  our  example,  and  endeav 
oring,  though  with  unequal  steps,  to  follow  in 


MEXICAN  WAR. 


our  path.  She  is  moreover  a  weaker  nation 
than  the  United  States.  Her  government  is 
feeble  and  distracted,  her  people  are  generally 
ignorant  and  devoid  of  enterprize.  By  the  si 
lent  operation  of  natural  causes,  our  race  has 
been  silently  but  resistlessly  encroaching  on 
the  Spanish- American.  It  is  evident  that  it 
must  yield  before  our  advance.  It  would  be 
contrary  to  all  our  ideas  to  imagine  Mexico  ob 
taining  extensive  trading  privileges  among  our 
citizens,  or  acquiring  in  any  manner  possession 
of  our  territory.  The  tendency  of  things  is 
all  the  other  way.  In  every  transaction  we 
must  be  the  gainer  and  she  the  loser.  No 
blame  attaches  to  us  on  this  account.  It  is  a 
fact  whose  cause  lies  beyond  the  reach  of  any 
political  policy. 

But  while  it  is  our  duty  to  cultivate  with  all 
nations  the  relations  of  friendship,  to  exercise 
that  regard  for  the  rights  of  others,  which  is 
the  best  security  for  our  own,  and  to  exhibit 
that  magnanimity  which  is  the  foundation  of 
the  highest  respect ;  these  circumstances  would 
seem  to  require  that  our  conduct  toward  Mex 
ico  should  have  been  marked  by  an  extraordi 
nary  forbearance  and  kindness.  Surely  we 


158  REVIEW  OF  THE 

should  bear  with  the  pride  or  the  jealousy  of 
a  feebler  nation,  which  is  conscious  of  our 
growth  at  her  expense,  from  causes  beyond 
her  power  as  well  as  our  own  to  control,  and 
pointing  to  consequences  which  she  can  only 
deprecate,  but  can  neither  avert  nor  stay. 

"  I  trust,"  said  Mr.  Calhoun,  in  March,  1846, 
"  that  we  shall  deal  generously  with  Mexico, 
that  we  shall  prove  ourselves  too  magnani 
mous  and  too  just  to  take  advantage  of  her 
feeble  condition."  We  cannot  resist  quoting 
a  few  words  from  the  remarks  made  by  a  sen 
ator  from  Kentucky,  on  the  receipt  of  the  war 
message  from  the  executive,  because  they  con 
tain  true  and  noble  sentiments,  which  could 
hardly  be  so  well  expressed  in  other  language. 

"  From  the  first  struggle  for  liberty  in  South 
America  and  Mexico,"  says  he,  "it  was  the 
cherished  policy  of  the  United  States  to  ex 
tend  to  those  republics  sympathy  and  friend 
ship. 

"  We  had  regarded  their  rising  as  an  imita 
tion  of  our  example — as  a  new  creation  of  re 
publics  united  by  strong  affinity  and  warm 
sympathy.  That  was  the  kind  and  generous 
view  taken.  As  the  head  of  the  republican 


MEXICAN  WAR.  159 


system,  our  policy  was  to  cheer  and  cherish 
them,  and  lead  them  in  the  way  to  that  liber 
ty  which  we  had  established,  and  of  which 
we  had  set  the  example.  Now  we  find  our 
selves  in  a  state  of  war  with  one  of  these  re 
publics.  We,  that  should  naturally  be  looked 
up  to  as  the  protector  of  them  all.  These 
generous  dispositions  are  all  vanished,  and 
war  and  bloodshed  have  taken  their  place. 
It  is  not  in  the  amount  of  precious  blood  that 
has  been  shed,  that  the  importance  of  this 
event  consists.  No,  it  is  the  great  political 
consequences,  the  evil  example  to  liberty  in 
every  place.  The  hand  of  one  republic  is 
stretched  out  in  hostility  against  another! 
And  I  deprecate  it  the  more  when  I  reflect, 
that  the  one  is  feeble  and  impotent,  that  an 
archy  and  revolutions  have  consumed  her 
strength,  and  that  she  needs  the  force  of  our 
example  and  aid  to  sustain  her,  lest  she  fall 
back  again  into  that  monarchy  from  which 
we  saw  her  with  pleasure  arise.  The  course 
that  has  been  pursued  cannot  have  been  that 
generous  and  forbearing  policy  which  ought 
to  be  exercised  by  this  great  republic.  We 


160  REVIEW  OF  THE 

are  so  much  mightier  than  they  are,  that  our 
condescension  would  be  noble." 

In  the  war  which  we  have  examined,  we  see 
all  these  principles  entirely  disregarded.  Im: 
pelled  by  a  lust  of  conquest,  the  United  States 
have  exhibited  in  it  a  spirit  of  injustice,  ag 
gression  and  violence.  The  war  which  they 
have  waged  has  been  for  the  redress  of  no 
wrong,  for  the  vindication  of  no  human  right. 
No  principle  of  humanity  is  claimed  to  have 
been  maintained  by  its  victories.  Nor  are  we 
entitled  to  any  respect  for  the  peace  which  fol 
lowed.  The  same  remorseless  selfishness  in 
spired  alike  its  beginning,  its  continuance  and 
its  end. 

Without  a  cause  worthy  of  a  civilized  na 
tion,  or  an  object  the  hope  of  whose  attain 
ment  could  inspire  devotion,  its  history  does 
not  present  a  single  circumstance  which  can  ex 
cuse  or  palliate  its  unmitigated  wrong.  Pos 
sessing  no  pretence  of  any  moral  aim,  utterly 
at  variance  with  every  object  for  which  the 
heart  of  this  age  has  sympathy,  men  must  gaze 
upon  it  only  in  sorrow,  unillumined  by  a  ray 
of  faith  or  hope. 


MEXICAN  WAR. 


CHAPTER   XIV. 


THE  Influence  of  this  War  upon  our  national  character,  and  on  the  cause 
of  Liberty  and  of  Christianity  at  home  and  abroad.  It  has  intro 
duced  crime  and  vice  among  us  It  has  awakened  a  spirit  of  con 
quest.  It  has  lowered  the  standard  of  public  morality  in  our  coun- 
try. 

THE  evil  impulses  of  our  nature  constitute 
a  law  of  selfishness,  which  prompts  man  to 
seek  his  own  interest  or  gratification,  regard 
less  of  the  happiness  or  rights  of  others,  and 
of  hatred  which  impels  him  to  seek  the  posi 
tive  evil  of  his  fellow  men.  Of  all  the  un 
happy  consequences  which  attend  the  exer 
cise  of  selfish  or  hateful  passions,  the  most  cer 
tain  and  terrible  are  those  which  revert  upon 
the  character  of  their  possessor.  These  seem 
to  follow  their  indulgence  by  a  fixed  and  eter 
nal  moral  law,  in  the  same  manner  that  cer 
tain  effects  follow  certain  causes  in  the  material 
world ;  by  a  necessity  of  the  same  nature  as 
that  by  which  the  felled  tree  falls  to  the 
6 


162  REVIEW  OF  THE 


ground,  or  the  parts  of  a  revolving  body  tend 
from  their  center.  They  are  the  parents 
of  fear,  of  suspicion,  of  envy  and  unsatisfied 
desires.  As  the  mind  passes  under  their  sub 
jection,  every  generous  voice  is  hushed,  every 
noble  prompting  is  stilled  within  it,  its  fac 
ulty  of  distinguishing  right  and  wrong  becomes 
deadened  and  distorted,  and  it  looses  the  capa 
city  for  participating  in  the  happiness  of  vir 
tue. 

"We  would  expect  to  find  the  evil  consequen 
ces  of  this  great  national  wrong  which  revert 
upon  the  character  of  our  people,  on  the  cause 
of  free  governments,  and  on  the  interests  of 
morality  and  religion,  insidious  in  their  nature, 
to  be  far  more  unhappy,  as  they  are  more  en 
during,  than  any  others  which  can  attend  or 
follow  it.  So  indeed  they  are. 

This  war  has  introduced  crime  and  vice 
among  us.  A  camp  is  the  notorious  home  of 
unbridled  passions.  Soldiers  in  a  foreign  coun 
try  feel  that  they  are  removed  from  all  the  re 
straints  of  civil  law,  and  whenever  the  bar 
rier  of  military  discipline  can  be  passed,|un- 
restrained  indulgence  is  sure  to  be  sought. 
No  one  can  know,  until  he  has  witnessed  it, 


MEXICAN  WAR. 


the  hardening  influence  of  war  upon  the  char 
acters  of  those  who  are  engaged  in  it.  He, 
who  under  the  name  of  glory  can  coolly  blow 
out  the  brains  of  his  fellow  man,  or  urge  a 
bayonet  into  his  bosom,  has  taken  a  lesson  in 
blood,  the  effects  of  which  he  has  rarely  the 
ability  or  disposition  to  shake  off.  When  the 
heart  has  become  regardless  of  human  misery, 
when  it  is  steeled  against  the  cry  of  agony  and 
the  prayer  for  life,  it  is  also  proof  against  the 
entrance  of  most  noble  sentiments  and  eleva 
ting  impulses.  Soldiers  are  commonly  drawn 
from  that  class  of  society  who  most  need  the 
checks  of  civil  law.  Having  been  removed 
from  its  authority  for  a  time,  it  is  difficult  for 
them  to  assume  again  the  character  of  peacea 
ble  citizens.  Martial  law  no  longer  holding 
them  in  restraint,  they  are  too  apt  to  feel  a 
spirit  of  reckless  defiance.  And  this  inhu 
manity  and  lawlessness  are  scattered  over  the 
land.  Its  breath  is  infection,  its  touch  is  con 
tagion.  It  breeds  a  moral  miasma  in  every 
community  which  comes  within  its  influence. 

This  war  has  excited  and  encouraged  among 
our  people  the  spirit  of  conquest  in  which  it 
had  its  origin.  It  is  difficult  for  a  people,  as 


164  REVIEW  OF  THE 

for  an  individual,  to  be  convinced  that  their 
own  desires  and  actions  are  unhallowed  and 
unjust.  Vice  is  the  most  cunning  of  flatter 
ers.  It  lulls  its  victim  to  security  with  a  song 
of  his  own  virtue  and  inability  to  err,  while  it 
holds  its  temptation  before  him  under  the  veil 
of  some  excellent  or  glorious  name.  Desire 
harbored  for  a  moment,  invents  a  thousand 
plausible  excuses  for  its  gratification,  until  we 
are  convinced  that  its  indulgence  is  hardly  in 
consistent  with  the  severest  morality.  Array 
ed  in  the  garments  of  virtue,  vice  often  dares  to 
-appeal  even  to  our  sense  of  duty,  and  we  strive 
to  believe  that  we  should  be  guilty  of  wrong 
in  refusing  to  obey  its  impulses. 

But  if  we  ever  free  ourselves  from  the  de 
ceiver,  we  shall  find  that  as  far  as  we  have  fol 
lowed  it,  just  so  far  every  moral  sense  has  be 
come  deadened  within  us,  and  virtue  herself 
has  lost  her  beauty  in  our  eyes. 

Let  us  not  attempt  to  deceive  ourselves. 
The  lust  of  conquest  has  begun  to  rage  among 
us.  It  is  called  "making  room  for  the  Anglo- 
Saxon  race,"  "  working  out  our  manifest  desti 
ny,"  and  "  enlarging  the  area  of  freedom."  It 
has  assumed  a  garb  of  the  noblest  humanity, 


MEXICAN  WAR.  165 


and  has  covered  its  face  with  a  mask  of 
wonderful  virtue.  But  it  is  the  spirit  of  con 
quest  still.  It  is  nothing  else  but  the  selfish  de 
sire  to  possess  that  which  belongs  to  another, 
and  a  recklessness  of  the  means  by  which  it 
may  be  obtained.  Let  us  reason  together, 
candid  reader,  whether  this  is  so. 

Does  our  race  need  room  ?  The  area  of  our 
country  before  the  war  was  about  eighteen 
hundred  thousand  square  miles,  capable  of  sus 
taining  a  population  of  at  least  three  hundred 
million  souls.  This  is  a  moderate  estimate. 
Its  capacity  is  probably  much  greater.  Vast 
regions  of  this  country  are  as  yet  almost  unex 
plored.  We  are  barely  twenty  millions  scat 
tered  over  a  part  of  its  surface. 

But  it  is  our  duty  we  are  told  to  provide  for 
posterity.  Should  our  population  continue  to 
double  once  in  thirty  years  as  it  is  now  doing, 
in  one  hundred  and  twenty  years  we  should 
reach  three  hundred  and  twenty  millions.  But 
any  one  who  reasons  upon  this  basis  will  fall 
into  a  great  mistake.  Of  course,  were  this 
reasoning  correct,  in  thirty  years  from  that 
time  we  should  number  six  hundred  millions, 
more  than  the  continent  woulcl  probably  sup- 


165  REVIEW  OF  THE 

port,  and  in  another  short  thirty  years  we 
should  be  double  that  number,  or  more  by  one- 
third  than  the  number  of  inhabitants  now  on 
the  globe.     It  is  more  probable  that  in  five 
hundred  years  this  country  will  hardly  con 
tain  three  hundred  million  souls.     It  is  a  law 
of  population,  that  as  a  people  become  dense 
they  multiply  more  slowly,  until  at  last  the  in 
crease  is  scarcely  perceptible,  as  in  China.   -No 
one  imagines  that  the  population  of  the  globe 
will  in  sixty  years  have  increased  fourfold.   The 
earth  could  not  sustain  such  swarms,  and  ere 
long  men  would  perish  of  universal  starvation. 
We  have  heretofore  increased  rapidly,  because 
we  were  a  young  people,  scattered  over  a  great 
and  attractive  country.     Probably  the  early 
colonists  on  our  coasts   often  doubled  their 
numbers  in  a  few  months.     How  does  this  mist, 
in  which  a  spirit  of  selfish  aggrandizement  has 
shrouded  itself,  fade  away  before  the  sunlight 
of  truth. 

But  it  is  truly  said  that  it  is  our  duty  to  pro 
vide  for  posterity.  The  provision  which  we 
should  make  for  them  should  not  be  vast  regions 
of  the  earth  which  they  will  not  need,  and  which 
must  be  acquired  by  injustice  and  wrong. 


MEXICAN  WAR.  167 

We  should  bequeath  to  them  an  unsullied 
national  character.  Our  conduct  must  Ibe  the 
example  for  their  imitation.  Happy  would 
that  people  be  which  could  look  back  over 
their  history  through  a  long  succession  of  just 
and  generous  actions  which  their  fathers  had 
performed,  all  whose  precedents  had  tended  to 
elevate  while  they  adorned  humanity.  We 
should  provide  for  them  a  higher  intellec 
tual  culture  than  has  been  bestowed  upon  us, 
and  should  develope  in  them  a  more  exalted 
moral  character  than  as  a  nation  we  now  pos 
sess.  These  would  constitute  the  greatest 
wealth,  the  most  glorious  inheritance  that  pos 
terity  could  receive  at  our  hands. 

In  our  own  proper  heritage  are  exhaustless 
resources  yet  to  be  developed.  Far  above  us 
is  a  civilization  yet  to  be  attained,  a  standard 
of  national  character  yet  to  be  striven  after. 
There  lie  the  true  objects  of  our  ambition,  in 
their  attainment  consists  our  true  glory.  Thus 
should  we  be  working  out  truly  our  manifest 
destiny ;  this  would  be  indeed  enlarging  the 
area  of  freedom. 

The  United  States  appear  to  have  acted  on 
the  assumption  that  they  possess  some  divine 


168  REVIEW  OF  THE 

right  to  whatever  is  most  valuable  on  this  con 
tinent,  especially  if  it  belongs  to  a  weaker  pow 
er.  For  instance,  it  was  urged  in  congress  be 
fore  the  war,  that  we  must  obtain  possession 
of  the  harbor  of  San  Francisco.  It  was  not 
claimed  that  we  had  any  title  to  it  whatever, 
it  was  acknowledged  to  be  an  undisputed 
possession  of  Mexico.  But  it  was  said,  it  is 
the  best  harbor  on  the  Pacific.  And  were 
not  the  rights  of  Mexico  sacred  ?  The  feel 
ing  in  this  country  seems  to  be,  we  will 
willingly  foster  that  young  republic,  but  she 
must  learn  to  be  satisfied  with  those  posses 
sions  which  we  do  not  want.  If  she  is  so  un 
reasonable  as  to  oppose  our  wishes,  we  must 
obtain  what  we  desire  by  force,  and  punish  such 
unheard  of  presumption. 

But  do  not  let  us  flatter  ourselves  that 
the  high  sounding  appellations  which  have 
been  employed  to  tickle  the  ears  of  this  peo 
ple  while  selfish  ambition  was  obtaining  domin 
ion  over  their  hearts,  are  original  with  us. 
They  have  been  the  themes  of  every  conquer 
or,  both  king  and  republic,  since  the  world  be 
gan.  There  never  lived  a  scourge  of  the  hu 
man  race  who  confessed  himself  a  villain.  All 


MEXICAN  WAR  169 


have  been  in  turn  persuaded  that  the  submis 
sion  of  nations  to  their  rule  was  necessary  for 
their  own  good,  that  they  had  been  sent  on  a 
mission  of  mercy  to  suffering  humanity. 

Alexander  and  Caesar,  Attila  and  Tamer 
lane,  all  felt  the  necessity  of  room  for  their  re 
spective  races,  and  were  doubtless  filled  with  a 
desire  to  work  out  their  manifest  destiny,  and 
enlarge  the  area  of  freedom.  Napoleon  was 
the  very  self-styled  child  of  destiny. 

This  war  has  encouraged  in  the  minds  of  our 
countrymen  the  desire  of  military  glory  for  its 
own  sake.  It  has  tended  to  dissatisfy  them 
with  the  comparatively  noiseless  pursuits  of 
peace,  and  has  created  a  longing  for  the  excite 
ment  of  battle,  and  the  applause  which  fol 
lows  victory. 

A  prominent  supporter  of  the  war  declared 
in  the  United  States  senate,  that  "  Europe  had 
almost  forgotten  us,  until  our  battles  on  the  Rio 
Grande  woke  her  up."  We  had  been  peopling 
a  wilderness  and  developing  its  exhaustless  re 
sources,  digging  canals  and  building  railroads, 
thousands  of  keels  were  plowing  our  inland 
waters,  we  were  sending  thought  instantaneous 
ly  to  every  extremity  of  the  land,  our  commerce 


170  REVIEW  OF  THE 

had  become  the  second  on  the  globe,  we  were 
triumphantly  teaching  and  developing  the 
great  principles  of  freedom,  our  country  was 
smiling  in  the  dawn  of  universal  education. 
And  could  statesmen  be  found  among  us  fo- 

o 

menting  discontent,  because  we  did  not  attract 
sufficiently  the  gaze  of  Europe  ?  Must  we  en 
gage  in  an  accursed  wrong  for  the  sake  of  no 
toriety  ? 

And  again  it  was'declared  by  the  same  sen 
ator  :  "  Let  modern  philanthropists  talk  as 
they  will,  the  instincts  of  nature  are  truer  than 
the  doctrines  they  preach.  Military  renown  is 
one  of  the  great  elements  of  national  strength, 
as  it  is  one  of  the  proudest  sources  of  gratifica 
tion  to  every  man  who  loves  his  country." 

This  declaration  is  worthy  of  the  cause  in 
support  of  which  it  was  uttered.  Its  morality 
deserves  our  especial  attention.  The  teach 
ings  of  Christianity  are  passed  by  unnoticed. 
The  fundamental  principles  of  moral  science 
are  entirely  lost  sight  of.  By  a  figure  of 
speech  similar  to  that  by  which  national  rob 
bery  is  softened  into  manifest  destiny,  the  wick 
ed  passions  of  man  are  exalted  to  "  instincts  of 
nature,"  and  before  this  modern  Baal  the  free- 


MEXICAN  WAR. 


men  of  America  are  called  upon  to  bow,  and 
offer  to  it  their  blind  adoration.  A  citizen 
standing  in  a  high  place  before  this  country 
thus  teaches  his  fellow  countrymen  to  abandon 
every  other  principle  of  action,  and  submit  to 
the  guidance  of  the  instincts  of  nature. 

But  irrespective  of  the  character  of  the  war, 
the  facts  of  having  woke  Europe  up,  and  of  hav 
ing  obtained  a  military  renown,  are  presented 
as  sufficient  reasons  why  we  should  be  gratified 
with  it.  If  we  had  gained  nothing  else,  say 
its  supporters,  these  should  constitute  a  source 
of  exultation.  Now  we  submit  that  no  re 
sult  of  a  war  can  be  a  sufficient  cause  of  ex 
ultation,  the  prospect  of  whose  attainment 
would  not  be  a  sufficient  reason  for  under 
taking  a  war.  Then  the  hope  of  military  re 
nown  is  a  sufficient  reason  to  induce  a  civilized 
nation  to  commence  a  war ;  a  doctrine  abhor 
rent  to  the  common  sense  of  humanity. 

"Whenever  men  are  gratified  with  a  bargain 
they  are  in  the  same  proportion  eager  to  make 
a  similar  one.  If  it  is  considered  that  milita 
ry  renown  and  the  satisfaction  of  having  woke 
Europe  up,  have  been  cheaply  purchased  by 
the  war,  and  that  this  result  is  so  much  in  our 


172  REVIEW  OF  THE 


favor  that  it  affords  matter  for  congratulation, 
the  desire  must  follow  to  purchase  the  same 
advantage  so  cheaply  again.  It  is  impossible 
that  a  nation  can  be  gratified  with  an  unjust 
war  or  conquest,  without  having  its  appetite 
sharpened  for  another.  Appetite  indulged  is 
appetite  unchained. 

Every  desire  of  the  heart  which  it  is  right 
to  gratify  at  all,  it  is  right  to  gratify  for  the 
mere  enjoyment  which  its  gratification  affords. 
Desires  are  not  to  be  judged  of  by  the  effects 
of  their  gratification.  They  are  innocent  or 
vicious  in  themselves,  and  if  their  indulgence 
is  proper  at  all,  they  may  be  indulged  for  their 
own  sake. 

Now  no  one  will  contend  that  the  desire  for 
military  glory  may  be  indulged  for  its  own 
sake,  that  it  is  right  to  gratify  this  "  instinct  of 
nature  "  merely  for  the  pleasure  that  attends 
its  gratification.  No,  this  is  the  doctrine  for 
the  practice  of  which  we  call  men  savages. 
Civilized  nations  do  not,  dare  not  go  to  war  for 
the  mere  delight  of  fighting.  There  never  liv 
ed  a  conqueror  who  dared  to  avow  his  passion 
for  blood,  or  who  did  not  seek  to  cloak  his  im 
pulses  under  a  garb  of  humanity.  Therefore, 


MEXICAN  WAR.  173 


as  the  gratification  of  this  desire  for  its  own 
sake  is  pronounced  infamous  by  the  common 
consent  of  mankind,  we  class  the  desire  itself 
among  the  unhallowed  passions  of  the  breast, 
whose  exercise  must  be  a  source  of  evil  to  the 
human  race,  and  whose  indulgence  and  cultiva 
tion  Christian  philanthropists  should  unite  to 
condemn,  and  Christian  governments  should 
labor  to  avoid. 

The  nation  which  rejoices  over  a  victory 
won  in  a  doubtful  cause,  just  so  far  indulges 
and  cultivates  a  love  of  war  for  its  own  sake. 

If  war  is  waged  in  support  of  some  great 
principle  of  freedom,  for  the  vindication  of  the 
rights  of  man,  it  is  fit  that  we  watch  its  pro 
gress  with  interest,  and  that  we  rejoice  over  its 
success.  Love  for  our  race  bids  us  be  glad  in 
the  faith  that  this  trampled  and  bruised  body 
of  humanity  will  be  raised  up  and  healed.  So 
if  a  treason  against  the  government  is  discov 
ered  and  its  actors  are  condemned  and  execu 
ted,  we  rejoice  at  the  preservation  of  the 
state.  But  while  we  acknowledge  the  justice 
of  the  punishment,  we  sympathize  with  the 
unhappy  beings  who  must  suffer  the  penalty 
of  the  law,  and  lament  the  necessity  that  die- 


174  REVIEW  OF  THE 


tates  their  doom.  While  then  we  exult  at  the 
triumphs  of  humanity,  and  indulge  in  the  cheer 
ing  prospect  of  the  elevation  of  our  race,  our 
joy  should  be  saddened  by  the  remembrance 
of  the  evil  and  suffering  through  which  this 
good  must  be  obtained,  and  which  the  sternest 
necessity  alone  is  sufficient  to  justify.  But 
when  war  itself  is  sought  for,  irrespective  of 
any  good  which  it  may  subserve,  when  victo 
ries  are  themes  of  rejoicing  to  men,  careless  of 
the  cause  in  which  they  were  won,  it  is  like 
the  idle  multitude  indulging  their  passion  for 
human  suffering  in  the  sight  of  an  execution, 
careless  whether  the  victim  has  been  justly  or 
unjustly  condemned,  thoughtless  whether  jus 
tice  and  the  laws  are  sustained  or  disregarded. 

o 

O  !  how  devoid  of  love  for  his  race  is  that  man, 
and  how  perverted  and  degraded  is  his  moral 
sense,  who  regardless  of  its  suffering,  its  evil 
and  its  awful  wrong,  can  rejoice  and  exult  over 
a  battle,  merely  because  -his  own  nation  has 
shown  her  physical  superiority  over  another. 
How  contemptible  does  this  spirit  become, 
when  it  glories  over  the  overthrow  of  a  foe  far 
weaker  than  ourselves,  even  like  an  infant  in 
our  grasp.  Is  there  no  higher  national  ambi- 


MEXICAN  WAR.  175 


tion  than  this  ?  Is  there  no  better,  no  nobler 
glory  for  a  people  than  supremacy  on  the  bat 
tle  field?  Ah,  yes.  True  wisdom  rejoices 
when  battles  are  not  fought,  when  victories  are 
not  won.  It  looks  upon  war  as  a  terrible  evil 
only  to  be  justified  as  a  last  resort  against  op 
pression  and  wrong,  and  when  not  waged  in 
the  cause  of  freedom,  with  all  its  magnificent 
pomp  and  circumstance,  to  be  but  murder, 
without  the  poor  excuse  of  anger,  that  tempo 
rary  madness. 

The  lust  of  conquest  and  the  desire  of  war 
for  its  own  sake,  the  most  wicked  passions  which 
can  enter  the  minds  of  a  people  are  the  great 
est  curses  of  any  state,  and  most  of  all.  of  a 
republic. 

Says  Cicero,  speaking  in  the  imperial  city, 
whose  glory  was  in  her  conquests,  and  which 
had  already  attained  the  empire  of  the  known 
world,  "But  if  we  would  make  a  just  estimate 
of  the  case,  we  should  find  both  greater  and 
more  glorious  actions  done  by  wisdom  at  home, 
than  by  arms  abroad."  "  Happy,"  says  Mon- 
tesque,  "  is  that  people  whose  annals  are  tire 


some." 


Wealth  destroyed  is  quickly  reproduced, 


J76  REVIEW  OF  THE 

there  comes  always  an  end  to  human  suffering 
and  sorrow,  generations  soon  arise  to  fill  the 
places  of  the  dead. 

These  are  not  the  consequences  of  war  over 
which  mankind  have  had  most  cause  to  mourn. 
It  deadens  and  degrades  the  moral  sense  of 
man,  and  destroys  his  perception  of  national 
and  individual  justice.  He  who  sees  no  wrong 
in  despoiling  a  weaker  state  of  her  possessions, 
is  restrained  only  by  the  laws  of  his  country 
and  the  frown  of  society  from  robbing  his 
neighbor  of  his  wealth.  Evil  propensities  ex 
hibit  themselves  the  same  under  all  circum 
stances.  There  is  no  distinction  between  pub 
lic  and  private  virtues  and  vices.  If  the  found 
ations  of  justice  are  sapped,  public  and  private 
principles  are  weakened  alike. 

"War  has  kindled  and  fanned  the  flame  of 
human  passion.  It  has  tended  powerfully  to 
deaden  the  finer  and  nobler  sentiments  of 
the  soul,  to  drive  from  the  heart  the  feelings 
of  humanity,  and  to  destroy  in  man  the  im 
pulse  to  love  his  fellow  man.  It  has  develop 
ed  and  cultivated  selfishness  and  hatred  in  all 
their  forms.  Impulses  to  evil,  once  excited, 
cannot  be  confined  in  their  operation  to  the 


MEXICAN  WAR.  J77 


objects  which,  aroused  them.  They  become  a 
part  of  the  character,  to  be  exhibited  at  all 
times,  to  be  exercised  under  all  circumstances. 
Peace  is  harmonious.  Where  it  is  destroyed 
among  nations,  it  cannot  exist  in  smaller  com 
munities,  nor  between  man  and  man ;  there  is 
war  even  among  the  tenants  of  the  same  bo 
som. 

These  lusts  have  opposed  morality  by  culti 
vating  every  vice.  They  have  been  the  dead 
liest  foes  of  Christianity,  for  they  have  awaken 
ed  every  passion  whose  exercise  its  precepts 
forbid,  and  which  its  persuasions  seek  to  still. 
They  tend  to  deaden  every  impulse  the  culti 
vation  of  which  is  the  end  of  religion,  and  in 
the  exercise  of  which  consists  the  happiness  of 
mankind. 

These  desires  for  conquest  and  military  glo 
ry,  in  which  this  war  had  its  origin  and  which 
it  has  encouraged,  and  whose  gratification  is 
the  greatest  crime  which  a  nation  can  commit, 
not  only  have  scattered  immorality  and  vice 
among  us,  have  tended  to  degrade  our  na 
tional  character,  to  destroy  the  sense  of  na 
tional  and  individual  justice,  and  develope 
evil  passions  among  our  people,  and  thus  op- 


178  KBVIEW  OF  THE 

posed  the  principles  of  Christianity ;  but  they 
have  impaired,  more  than  any  other  influence 
can,  the  foundation  of  our  liberties.  The  cause 
of  freedom  has  no  other  foe  so  much  to  be 
dreaded,  whose  approach  is  so  insidious,  whose 
triumph  is  so  sure. 

Liberty  must  be  founded  on  equality  and 
fraternity.  It  must  be  established  in  a  com 
mon  sympathy,  it  must  rest  on  a  love  of  all 
mankind,  or  it  can  have  no  secure  foundation. 
Perfect  liberty  can  never  exist  without  perfect 
fraternity,  or  unless  the  divine  command  is 
obeyed  and  every  man  love  his  neighbor  as 
himself.  Liberty  then  in  its  best  form  among 
men,  must  be  imperfect,  and  whatever  tends 
to  stop  or  interrupt  the  current  of  sympathy 
between  men,  must  tend  to  its  de  ^truction. 
•  Now  selfishness,  jealousy,  anger  and  hatred, 
are  not  generally  the  consequences  of  external 
causes.  They  exist  in  the  heart  itself.  Where 
they  exist  they  are  constantly  seeking,  and 
they  rarely  fail  to  discover  opportunities  for 
their  exercise.  In  a  republic  like  ours,  it  sure 
ly  becomes  us  to  fear  the  consequences  of  their 
development  and  cultivation,  by  means  such  as 
these.  We  should  tremble  lest  when  there 


MEXICAN  WAR.  179 


were  no  more  conquests  to  be  made,  and  no 
more  foes  to  overcome,  the  same  evil  passions, 
now  become  a  part  of  our  national  character, 
should  seek  their  exercise  in  domestic  commo 
tion,  should  array  the  parts  of  our  glorious 
"Union  in  hostility  against  each  other,  and  by 
their  silent  but  resistless  progress  effect  the 
downfall  of  American  liberty. 

Let  us  not  feel  that  our  liberties  are  so  strong 
that  no  force  can  prevail  against  them.  "  The 
sentinel  may  "  not  "  sleep  securely  on  his  post." 
Imperfect  man  cannot  guard  too  watchfully  his 
imperfect  work  from  ruin.  "  Best  safety  lies  in 
fear."  "  Eternal  vigilance  is  the  price  of  liber 
ty."  We  may  fear  no  outward  assault.  We 
may  liken  ourselves  to  some  proud  cliff  that 
overhangs  the  sea,  and  around  whose  base  the 
billows  dash  and  roar  in  vain,  while  it  looks  in 
towering  grandeur  on  the  wild  war  of  waters 
beneath ;  but  if  we  guard  not  well  the  ap 
proaches  of  this  insidious  foe,  coming  genera 
tions  may  liken  us  to  the  same  rock,  in  which 
the  tiny  insect  had  been  laboring  unseen,  per 
forating  and  weakening  its  foundation,  until  it 
could  no  longer  sustain  the  overhanging  brow, 
when  suddenly  the  landmark  which  had  gui- 


180  REVIEW  OF  THE 


ded  the  mariner  to  his  port  is  swallowed  up 
forever  by  the  waves.  The  warrior  who  had 
fought  all  day  in  battle  unharmed,  whose  ar 
mor  of  proof  had  warded  off  every  blow,  and 
whose  arm  had  vanquished  every  adversary, 
weary  and  faint  lays  himself  down  on  the  bat 
tle  field  at  night,  and  while  he  sleeps  the  still 
falling  dew  comes  through  the  joints  of  his 
harness,  its  damp,  deadening  influence  pervades 
every  nerve  and  channel  of  his  frame,  and  he 
awakes  to  disease,  delirium  and  death. 

Let  us  take  warning  by  republics  that  have 
ceased  to  be.  It  was  no  thunderbolt  from 
Heaven  that  dashed  their  power  in  pieces.  It 
was  no  earthquake  that  overthrew  their  cities. 
Their  work  of  ages  fell  not  in  a  day,  nor  did 
external  force  accomplish  their  destruction. 
It  was  the  slow,  certain  moral  consumption  en 
gendered  by  war  and  conquest,  working  in  ev 
ery  individual  of  those  states,  and  decaying  the 
foundations  of  their  strength.  Athenians, 
doubtless,  loved  their  liberties  as  well  as  we ; 
but  when  public  virtue  is  lost,  when  public  jus 
tice  is  disregarded,  when  no  noble  magnanimity 
is  exhibited,  and  peace  and  the  love  of  humani 
ty  are  not  cultivated  by  the  state,  they  cannot 


MEXICAN  WAR. 


long  be  found  in  the  great  mass  of  its  citizens. 
Thus  it  was  with  Athens,  and  Philip's  gold 
could  purchase  those  liberties  which  the  armies 
of  Persia  had  been  hurled  against  in  vain. 

We  may  exclaim  as  Hazael  to  the  prophet, 
is  thy  servant  a  dog  that  he  should  do  this 
great  thing !  A  careless  self-confidence  is  the 
surest  omen  of  the  fall  of  virtue.  The  lust  of 
conquest  and  of  blood  is  a  craving  which 
never  cries  enough,  whose  appetite  is  only 
sharpened  by  that  on  which  it  feeds.  They 
who  had  conquered  the  world  could  not  rest. 
When  her  victories  had  bore  Eome  ta  such  a 
pitch  of  splendid  degradation  that  spectacles 
of  human  agony  and  blood  could  alone  satisfy 
even  her  female  sex,  when  the  stern  virtue  of 
the  republic  was  gone,  and  there  were  no  more 
nations  in  the  known  world  to  conquer,  the 
arms  of  her  legions  were  turned  against  each 
other.  Her  lieutenants  fought  among  them 
selves  for  the  dictatorship  and  the  imperial 
purple,  the  blood  of  her  children  was  shed  in 
her  streets,  proscription  sent  her  most  virtu 
ous  and  noble  citizens  to  death,  and  the  em 
pire  was  sold  by  the  army  for  gold.  Then 
only  was  it  that  the  strength  of  the  barbari- 


1S2  REVIEW  OF  THE 


ans  could  force  her  defences  of  u  ancient  re 
nown  and  disciplined  valor."  Then  only  did 
the  flames  of  invasion  blacken  the  vineyards 
of  Italy,  and  the  glory  of  Home  follow  her  lib 
erties  to  the  toinb. 

Our  liberties  were  too  costly  to  be  lost  by 
injustice  and  wrong.  The  cause  of  humanity 
is  too  dear  to  be  thus  sacrificed  to  unhallowed 
ambition.  If  we  would  avoid  the  fate  of 
Rome,  let  us  not  commit  her  crimes,  let  us  not 
despise  her  warning  voice. 

Peace  is  pre-eminently  the  policy  of  a  free 
people.     Men  longing  for  the  establishment  of 
freedom  throughout  the  civilized  world,  look  to 
us  in  confidence  that  we  will  not  fail  nor  falter  in 
its  cause.     Universal  peace  must  co-exist  writh 
universal  freedom.     Founded  in  the  same  prin 
ciples  of  the  love  of  humanity  and  an  enlarged 
sympathy,  they  are  incapable  long  of  separate 
existence,  each  is  necessary  to  the  other.     It  is 
the  office  of  freedom  to  establish  peace.    Peace 
alone  can  perpetuate  freedom.     War  and  des 
potism  are  kindred  curses.     Liberty  and  peace 
should  smile  upon  mankind  together.     Truly 
is  our  mission  one  of  peace  and  good  will  to 
man.     Liberty  mast  be  obtained  by  stern  con- 


MEXICAN  WAR.  183 


flict  with  oppression.  The  highest  justice  and 
humanity  can  alone  preserve  it.  Moreover  it 
is  only  by  the  exercise  of  these  national  vir 
tues  that  we  can  present  an  example  of  free 
dom  to  the  world  so  attractive  to  man,  that 
before  its  influence  thrones  will  crumble  and 
their  bulwarks  melt  away. 

True  patriotism  is  something  widely  differ 
ent  from  that  blind  and  thoughtless  enthusi 
asm  which  cries  my  country  right  or  wrong, 
which  is  fit  to  be  made  the  instrument  of  de 
signing  ambition,  but  is  unworthy  to  control 
the  conduct  of  a  free  people.  It  knows  no 
interest  of  its  country  opposed  to  the  cause  of 
humanity.  It  sees  no  good  in  any  thing  which 
must  be  obtained  by  wrong.  It  loves  its  coun 
try  too  much  silently  to  see  it  invading  the  sa 
cred  rights  of  others.  It  is  a  brave  thing. 
It  cannot  be  compelled  to  hold  its  peace,  when 
its  government  engages  in  acts  of  injustice  and 
wrong. 

Let  us  then  as  a  nation  banish  from  our  minds 
these  restless  passions,  which  must  conquer  us, 
unless  we  rise  and  conquer  them.  Let  us  ex 
ercise  our  ambition  and  seek  our  glory  in  the 
cultivation  of  peace,  and  in  the  attainment  of 


REVIEW  OF  THE! 


a  nobler  and  higher  civilization.  Let  us  look 
for  our  prosperity  in  the  paths  of  tranquility, 
and  strive  to  establish  our  liberties  in  exalted 
justice  and  love  and  good  will  to  man. 


MEXICAN  WAR.  185 


CHAPTEE    XV. 


OF  the  establishment  of  permanent  peace  among  civilized  nations.  The 
means  by  which  this  object  can  be  attained.  The  necessity  which 
will  justify  a  nation  in  resorting  to  arms.  Prospect  of  the  triumph 
of  peace.  . 

.  THE  ancient  heathen  poets,  chroniclers  of 
the  earliest  periods  of  the  past,  record  the 
wonders  of  a  golden  age  in  times  anterior  -to 
their  own ;  when  man,  clothed  with  the  majesty 
of  the  celestial,  gazed  with  nndrooping  eye 
upon  the  radiant  forms  of  the  immortals,  and 
listened  in  free  intercourse  to  the  divine  ora 
cles  that  fell  from  their  lips.  But  toward  the 
void  of  coming  ages  their  imagination  seems 
never  to  have  directed  its  flight. 

The  Roman  sang  of  that  age  when  Saturn 
in  his  divinity  walked  on  earth,  and  cast  over 
their  land  a  verdure,  and  over  their  sky  a  bril 
liancy  which  yet  bloomed  in  its  fertile  plains, 
and  lingered  in  its  balmy  air  and  in  its  deep 


286  REVIEW  OF  THE 

"blue  heavens,  faint  tokens  of  the  former  glori 
ous  presence  of  Deity. 

The  Grecian  loved  t<*  sing  of  the  earth  as  it 
was  when  Orpheus  tamed  ferocity  by  the 
strange  enchantment  of  his  lyre  ;  when  through 
glade,  by  waterfall,  kt  beneath  the  glassy  noon 
tide  and  under  the  silver  stars,"  beings  of  ce 
lestial  form  and  beauty  were  seen  to  walk,  and 
every  grove  and  every  fountain  was  rendered 
lovely  by  the  guardiancy  of  the  Naiad  and  the 
Fawn. 

The  Persian  in  the  rich  coloring  of  oriental 
fancy,  describes  a  scene  lovely  as  Paradise — 
when  Ormuzd  held  dominion  over  earth  and 
ocean,  when  the  Houri  fanned  a  balmy  air  with 
lulling  plumes,  trod  with  tinkling  feet  on  em 
erald  turf,  and  reposed  in  quiet  beauty  beneath 
a  rose-colored  sky,  and  the  Peri  sent  up  strange, 
ravishing  melodies  from  the  coral  depths  of  its 
ocean  home. 

But  the  harp  of  the  Christian  poet  in  that 
distant  age  was  struck  to  a  nobler  song. 

The  past  had  indeed  themes  for  him  far 
above  all  that  heathen  imagination  could 
frame.  For  him  God  had  created  the  heavens 
and  the  earth,  had  said  "let  there  be  light,  and 


MEXICAN  WAR.  187 


there  was  light,"  had  fixed  to  the  sea  its  bound. 
For  him,  man  had  dwelt  in  the  beauty  of  in 
nocence  in  a  garden  planted  by  the  hand,  and 
made  glorious  by  the  presence  of  the  Lord. 
For  him  the  bow  of  promise  had  been  set  in 
the  clouds  by  the  same  Almighty  One  who  in, 
awful  displeasure  had  brought  a  flood  of  wa 
ters  upon  the  earth,  and  beneath  whose  judg 
ment  of  fire  the  smoke  of  the  cities  of  the  plain 
"  went  up  as  the  smoke  of  a  furnace." 

For  him  his  fathers  had  been  made  to  pass 
on  dry  land  through  the  midst,  while  "the 
flood  stood  upright  as  an  heap,  and  the  depths 
were  congealed  in  the  heart  of  the  sea."  For 
him  Jehovah  had  descended  to  earth,  and  with 
thunderings  and  lightnings  and  thick  darkness 
and  the  voice  of  a  trumpet  had  declared  his 
law  to  man,  while  Sinai  quaked  at  the  pres 
ence  of  its  God. 

But  nothing  of  all  the  past  did  he  sing.  His 
was  a  yet  grander  theme.  In  inspired  vision 
the  veil  of  the  future  had  been  lifted  before 
him.  He  had  heard  from  immortal  lips  the 
glad  tidings  of  peace  on  earth  and  good  will  to 
men.  He  had  beheld  the  exalted  destiny  of 
Ms  race.  He  had  witnessed  the  glorious  spread 


188  REVIEW  OF  THE 

of  that  spiritual  kingdom  which  shall  extend 
"  from  sea  to  sea,  and  from  the  river  to  the 
ends  of  the  earth." 

Forgetting  at  once  the  present  and  the  past, 
his  rapt  spirit  passes  into  the  deep  bosom  of 
the  future,  and  beyond  the  shores  of  time,  and 
in  language  most  sublime  breaks  forth  into  re 
joicing  song. 

The  Hebrew  prophets  point  forward  to  a 
distant  time  when  man  should  attain  his  high 
est  earthly  development  and  happiness,  and 
this  they  always  represent  as  an  age  of  peace. 
They  employ  the  highest  language  of  poetry, 
and  the  grandest  imagery,  to  describe  that 
reign  of  the  Prince  of  Peace,  when  we  are  told 
that  "  the  Lord  will  break  the  bow  and  the 
sword  and  the  battle  out  of  the  earth,  and  will 
make  them  to  lie  down  in  safety ;"  "men  shall 
beat  their  swords  into  ploughshares,  and  their 
spears  into  pruning  hooks,  nation  shall  not  lift 
up  sword  against  nation,  neither  shall  they 
learn  war  any  more ;"  "  violence  shall  no  more 
be  heard  in  thy  land,  wasting  nor  destruction 
within  thy  borders ;"  "  the  wolf  shall  dwell 
with  the  lamb,  and  the  leopard  shall  lie  down 
with  the  kid,  the  calf,  the  young  lion  and  the 


MEXICAN  WAR.  189 


fatling  together,  and  a  little  child  shall  lead 
them." 

Since  these  prophecies  were  uttered,  nearly 
three  thousand  years  have  elapsed.  They  yet 
remain  entirely  unfulfilled.  No  nation  has 
ever  exhibited  to  the  world  an  example  of  the 
practice  of  peace.  Indeed  the  condition  of 
society  has  been  such  in  every  age,  that  no 
single  state  could,  consistently  with  its  own 
safety  and  with  justice  to  its  citizens,  have 
neglected  at  any  time  its  means  of  defence,  or 
avoided  always  the  calamities  of  war. 

The  earth  has  been  continually  filled  with 
the  noise  and  the  blood  of  battle.  Civiliza 
tion  has  exhibited  its  superiority  over  barba 
rism  not  in  avoiding  war,  but  in  perfecting  its 
science.  Still  the  believer  in  inspiration  can 
not  doubt  that  the  age  of  universal  peace,  so 
plainly  foretold,  will  surely  come. 

Can  we  now  discern  in  the  horizon  of  time, 
the  signs  of  its  coming  ?  Can  we  indulge  the 
reasonable  hope  that  its  dawn  will  be  in  our 
day  ?  What  are  the  means  by  which  it  can 
be  hastened  ?  These  are  great  practical  ques 
tions  which  involve  the  highest  interests  of  hu- 


190  REVIEW  OF  THE 


inanity.     They  are  questions  which  a  true  phi 
losophy  is  adequate  to  solve. 

This  and  this  alone  can  direct  aright  the  ef 
forts  of  philanthropy,  and  point  out  the  true 
means  on  which  the  peacemaker  may  rely  for 
ultimate  success.  This  can  read  in  history  the 
confirmation  of  prophecy,  and  discern  in  the 
past  the  auguries  of  the  future.  This  can  tell 
the  lover  of  his  race  how  and  how  alone  peace 
on  earth  can  be  attained,  and  from  its  moun 
tain  top  can  signal  to  the  multitude  in  the  val 
leys  when  to  watch  for  the  dawn  of  its  glori 


ous  morning. 


Let  us  first  inquire,  then,  if  perchance  we 
may  discover  what  are  the  means  by  which 
permanent  peace  among  civilized  nations,  when 
ever  it  shall  be  attained,  must  be  brought 
about.  What  are  the  influences,  what  are  the 
motives  in  which  and  in  which  alone  lies  that 
great  power  to  induce  enlightened  states  to 
disband  their  armies,  to  convert  their  navies 
to  the  use  of  peaceful,  friendship-strengthen 
ing  commerce,  to  dismantle  their  for  tresses  and 
dock- yards,  to  abandon  war  to  the  barbarian 
and  the  brute,  and  establish  their  intercourse 


MEXICAN  WAR. 


on  the  principles   of  justice,  humanity  and 
peace  ? 

Are  there  any  means  of  which  we  can  say, 
whenever  peace  on  earth  shall  be  established, 
by  these  and  by  these  alone  must  it  be  done  ? 
We  believe  that  there  are. 

All  reasons  which  can  be  urged  against  the 
practice  of  war  are  embraced  in  these  four ;  its 
cost,  direct  and  indirect ;  the  suffering  and  loss 
of  life  that  it  occasions  ;  its  injurious  effects 
upon  society ;  its  wickedness.  The  first  three 
of  these  it  will  be  perceived  are  consequences 
of  war,  the  last  is  its  character,  as  the  act  of 
moral  beings. 

The  third  reason  which  we  have  mentioned 
can  hardly  be  included  among  arguments  by 
which  nations  are  to  be  influenced  to  peace. 
The  unhappy  effects  of  war  upon  the  charac 
ter  of  society,  though  undoubtedly  the  great 
est  of  all  its  evils,  are  not  palpable  to  the 
sense,  are  silent  and  almost  un perceived  in 
their  operation,  and  their  results,  especially 
•when  withstood  by  counteracting  influences, 
are  slowly  worked  out  through  many  genera 
tions.  It  is  impossible  that  these  should  be 
appreciated  by  the  mass  of  mankind,  they  are 


192  REVIEW  OF  THE 


fully  realized  by  but  very  few.  They  may 
therefore  be  properly  omitted  in  our  exam 
ination. 

From  the  days  of  the  good  St.  Pierre,  hu 
mane  men  have  been  laboring  to  persuade  na 
tions  to  peace,  by  portraying  the  horrors  of 
war.  The  resources  of  language  seem  to  have 
been  exhausted  in  presenting  startling  pictures 
of  its  sacrifice  of  life,  the  amount  of  suffering 
which  it  occasions,  the  homes  and  hearts  which 
it  makes  desolate. 

In  this  economical  age,  philosophers  who  are 
endeavoring  to  solve  the  great  problems  of  so 
ciety,  have  attempted  to  compute  the  cost  01 
war,  and  we  hear  the  result  in  sums  whose  ag 
gregate  is  almost  beyond  the  reach  of  num 
bers. 

To  the  presentation  of  these  arguments 
against  war,  drawn  from  its  consequences,  the 
labors  of  many  good  men  have  been  and  are 
now  directed ;  but  history  proves  to  us  that 
these  have  little  if  any  effect  to  deter  a  brave 
people,  or  an  ambitious  government  from  its 
prosecution. 

The  past  and  the  present  unite  in  testimony 
to  this  truth,  that  the  power  of  numbers  and 


MEXICAN  WAR.  193 


language  might  be  exerted  till  tlie  end  of  time 
in  demonstrating  the  wastefulness  and  por 
traying  the  horrors  of  war,  and  were  no  other 
influence  employed  to  prevent,  its  examples 
would  not  cease  to  multiply. 

If  we  seek  in  the  philosophy  of  our  nature 
for  an  explanation  of  this  fact  which  is  so 
plainly  taught  in  history,  we  shall  find  abund 
ant  reason  why  this  is  and  ever  must  be  so. 

As  war  is  universal  among  men,  we  must 
seek  for  its  causes  among  the  common  im 
pulses  of  humanity.  We  find  them  in  these 
three ;  hatred,  selfishness  and  the  passion  for 
excitement.  The  first  is  its  most  frequent 
cause  in  those  ruder  forms  of  society  where 
passion  is  unrestrained  and  men  have  but  lit 
tle  to  be  selfish  of.  The  second  is  its  exciting 
motive  among  civilized  nations.  These  assume 
various  forms  of  development,  but  all  the  same 
in  essence.  Every  war  recorded  in  history  has 
been  prompted  on  the  part  of  one  combatant 
at  least,  by  some  motive  directly  referable  to 
selfishness  or  hatred. 

The  passion  for  excitement  is  common  to 
every  state  of  society,  and  finds  in  war  its  high 
est  gratification.     Quickened  into  activity  as 
7 


194  REVIEW  OF  THE 


the  rumor  or  the  anticipation  of  war  flies  from 
mouth  to  mouth  through  a  nation,  it  makes 
men  blind  to  the  wrongs  which  they  have  com 
mitted,  it  magnifies  the  injuries  which  they 
have  received,  it  conjures  up  a  thousand  which 
have  never  existed ;  for  the  multitude,  who  even 
in  a  free  country  can  rarely  give  a  single  intel 
ligent  reason  why  they  are  engaged  in  war,  it 
invents  a  thousand  why  their  foe  deserves 
neither  pity  nor  forbearance,  it  cries  to  men 
that  their  national  honor,  something  of  which 
they  generally  have  a  very  indefinite  idea,  is 
at  stake,  it  snatches  away  their  reason. 

Nor  must  we  overlook  the  influence  of  the 
pomp  and  circumstance  and  splendor  with 
which  war  is  invested,  not  of  the  doctrine, 
handed  down  from  the  remotest  antiquity  and 
implicitly  received  by  millions,  and  lately  pre 
sented  in  the  United  States  senate*  as  a  po 
litical  axiom,  that  military  renown  is  the  found 
ation  of  national  glory,  and  the  proudest  source 
of  gratification  to  every  man  who  loves  his 
country. 

Nations  as  a  general  rule  believe  their  quar 
rel  to  be  right. 

*  See  speech  of  Lewis  Cass,  Congressional  Globe,  1347-8,  page  87. 


MEXICAN  WAR.  195 


It  is  a  principle  of  rabble  nature  eagerly  to 
believe  every  falsehood  which  may  be  invent 
ed  to  support  their  side  of  a  dispute,  and  with 
equal  vehemence  to  deny  and  ridicule  all 
statements  of  their  adversary.  Thus  it  hap 
pens,  that  whatever  the  truth  may  be,  or  what 
ever  doubts  those  who  reflect  may  afterwards 
come  to  entertain,  a  nation  hardly  ever  enters 
upon  a  war  without  feeling  a  sense  of  injury 
and  a  conviction  that  its  cause  is  just. 

Let  him  who  doubts  this,  consider  the  feel 
ing  which  pervaded  the  mass  of  the  American 
people  at  the  commencement  of  the  war  with 
Mexico,  certainly  one  of  the  most  unjust  and 
causeless  outrages,  on  the  part  of  our  govern 
ment,  ever  perpetrated  by  a  civilized  people. 
Let  him  remember  how  few  there  were,  .who  in 
the  excitement  of  that  hour  dared  to  doubt 
the  righteousness  of  our  cause,  and  the  duty  of 
every  patriot  to  bid  it  God  speed,  and  how 
their  feeble  voice  was  lost  in  the  shout  of  the 
nation. 

Moreover  the  feelings  excited  by  the  conse 
quences  of  war  are  themselves  fleeting,  aird  in 
capable  of  producing  on  most  minds  a  perma 
nent  impression.  It  may  be  questioned  wheth- 


196  REVIEW  OF  THE 

er  the  sympathy  for  suffering  excited  by  the 
view  or  the  description  of  a  great  battle  is  not 
well  nigh  lost  in  the  enthusiasm  and  sense  of 
sublimity  inspired  by  marshaled  armies  and 
their  magnificent  array,  the  skillful  combina 
tions  and  varying  fortune  of  the  field,  the  shock 
of  charging  hosts  over  the  trembling  earth  and 
amid  the  thunder  of  the  cloud,  the  whirlwind 
of  pursuit  and  the  shouts  of  victory. 

In  these,  then,  passion  and  selfishness,  self- 
justifying  popular  enthusiasm  and  love  of  ex 
citement,  the  thirst  for  military  renown,  the 
fear  of  national  shame,  in  these  lie  the  causes 
of  war ;  these  are  the  foes  within  itself,  against 
which  humanity  must  contend.  Can  they  foe- 
overthrown,  can  their  influence  upon  the  con 
duct  of  nations  be  destroyed  by  arguments 
drawn  from  the  consequences  of  war  ? 

These  teach  us  only  that  war  is  a  political 
evil.  They  show  it  to  be  a  vast  expense,  an 
injury  to  commerce  and  to  peaceful  arts,  and  a 
waste  of  blood  and  life.  Beyond  this  they  can 
teach  us  nothing.  Of  its  nature  as  a  moral 
act  they  leave  urs  profoundly  ignorant.  All 
our  notions  concerning  the  moral  character  of 
war  will  be  found  on  examination  to  be  deriv- 


MEXICAN  WAR.  197 


ed  frdm  sources  entirely  different.  From  the 
fact  that  a  certain  act,  we  are  ignorant  what, 
caused  suffering  or  loss  of  property  or  of  life, 
-we  cannot  conclude  that  that  act  was  wrong. 
FOF  all  that  we  yet  know  it  might  have  been 
wrong  to  have  refrained  from  its  commission. 
We  demand  first  to  know  what  the  act  was, 
and  then  from  its  nature,  irrespective  of  its 
consequences,  we  determine  its  quality  as  right 
or  wrong. 

The  mass  of  men  believe  that  it  is  glorious 
^o  triumph  in  battle ;  the  consequences  of  war, 
teaching  it  only  to  be  a  political  evil,  cannot 
effect  that  belief.  They  are  powerless  to  de 
stroy  the  excuses  which  selfishness  and  the  de 
sire  of  excitement  frame  to  justify  their  grati 
fication. 

Lies  there  then  in  this  truth  that  war  is  a 
political  evil  the  power  to  effect  its  abolish 
ment.  Can  this  counteract  the  influence  of  its 
splendor  and  the  desire  for  military  renown  2 
Is  this  truth,  if  universally  admitted,  able  to 
calm  the  enthusiasm  of  a  people,  to  induce 
them  to  forego  the  gratification  of  this  most  in 
tense  passion  for  excitement,  and  refrain  from 
engaging  in  a  war  which  they  believe  to  be 


198  REVIEW  OF  THE 


just,  to  persuade  them  to  disobey  what  they 
esteem  the  voice  of  patriotism,  and  leave  un- 
vindicated  their  country's  honor,  which  they 
"believe  can  only  be  maintained  l)#  arms  ? 

The  question  suggests  its  own  answer. 
There  have  been  struggles  in.  which  it  was  the 
duty  of  men  to  engage,  from  which  it  would 
have  been  a  crime  to  shrink.  There  is  a  ne 
cessity  which  when  it  arises  will  justify  the 
appeal  to  arms.  The  consequences  of  war 
furnish  a  very  erroneous  principle  by  which  to 
determine  what  this  necessity  is.  For,  viewed 
as  a  political  evil,  political  necessity,  it  must  be 
admitted,  will  justify  a  resort  to  it.*  Every 
state  must  be  the  judge  of  this  necessity  in  its 
own  case,  and  where  is  the  nation  that  ever 
rushed,  however  blindly,  into  a  contest  which 
it  did  not  persuade  itself  was  necessary  ? 


*  The  term  political  necessity  is  commonly  used  in  a  loose  and  indefi 
nite  sense,  and  is  perhaps  incapahle  of  a  precise  definition.  A  mere 
evil  to  society  may  lightly  be  incurred  when  it  becomes  necessary  for  the 
attainment  of  a  greater  good.  The  propriety  or  wrong  of  incurring  the 
evil  is  determined  solely  by  the  answer  to  the  utilitarian  question,  will  it 
or  will  it  not  effect  a  greater  good.  And  this  can  never  be  answered  ab 
solutely,  but  only  according  to  the  opinion  of  society  itself.  When  in  the 
judgment  of  a  civilized  state  this  calamity  of  war  will  be  more  than  com 
pensated  by  the  good  which  through  it  they  may  reasonably  expect  with 
out  injustice  to  attain,  there  arises  what  we  here  call  a  political  necessity 
for  engaging  in  it.  If  war  is  indeed  what  its  consequences  can  only 
prove  it  to  be,  a  mere  evil  to  society,  political  necessity  of  course  justifies 
a  resort  to  it. 


MEXICAN  WAR.  ^99 


If  apprehension  of  the  consequences  of  war, 
which  cannot  teach  us  that  it  is  wrong,  nor 
correct  the  belief  that  it  is  the  foundation  of 
national  glory,  could  avail  to  deter  a  nation 
from  engaging  in  it,  when  political  necessity 
seems  to  justify  and  demand  it,  that  nation 
would  surely  be  amenable  to  the  charge  of 
cowardice.  A  coward  is  one  in  whom  the  fear 
of  the  personal  dangers  and  evils  of  war  is 
strong  enough  to  withstand  and  overcome 
the  influence  of  excitement  and  passion.  The 
higher  motives  and  nobler  feelings  of  our  na 
ture  are  not  felt  by  him  at  all.  A  mere  an 
imal  impulse  in  his  breast  is  conquered  by 
mere  animal  fear.  But  he  whom  the  fear 
to  do  wrong  sustains  and  bears  triumphant 
through  all  influences  and  temptations  to  evil 
is  the  bravest  of  mankind.  He  lives  in  a  higher 
world,  and  his  conduct  is  governed  by  principles 
above  the  comprehension  of  the  other.  The 
latter  obeys  the  highest,  the  former  the  low 
est  motives  of  human  action. 

We  see  now  that  it  is  vain,  and  we  see  why 
it  is  vain  to  attempt  by  prudential  considera 
tions  to  procure  the  abandonment  of  war,  be 
cause  its  causes  lie  in  impulses  of  our  nature  to 


200  REVIEW  OF  THE 

which  these  cannot  furnish  any  counteracting 
principle.  We  see  that  the  attempt  would  be 
no  more  fruitless  to  stop  the  torrent  of  Niaga 
ra  in  the  midst  of  its  leap,  than  to  stop,  the  tide 
of  human  passion  and  of  human  blood  by  pre 
senting,  though  it  be  never  so  fearful,  a  picture 
of  its  wastefulness  and  its  calamities.  And  we 
see,  moreover,  not  only  that  the  consequences 
of  war  cannot  restrain  nations  from  its  prac 
tice,  but  that  when  a  political  necessity  seems 
to  demand  a"resort  to  it,  it  would  be  a  reproach 
to  humanity  if  they  could. 

There  remains  but  one  reason  which  can  be 
urged  against  the  practice  of  war.  This  is, 
that  it  is  in  its  nature  wrong — that  for  society 
to. take  human  life,  to  deprive  their  fellow  men 
of  existence,  the  gift  of  their  common  Creator, 
over  which  no  dominion  is  given  them,  and 
which  they  cannot  restore,  is  to  invade  the  pre 
rogative  of  Deity,  is  to  commit  a  crime  against 
the  laws  of  God. 

This  truth,  if  it  be  a  truth,  cannot  as  we 
have  seen  be  proven  by  any  argument  drawn 
from  the  consequences  of  war.  They  can  only 
show  it  to  be  a  political  evil.  A  political  evil 
can  be  justified  by  political  necessity.  A  crime 


MEXICAN  WAR.  201 


against  divine  law  can  be  justified  only  by  the 
necessity  of  self-preservation. 

Is  then  war  a  crime  ?  The  civilized  portion 
of  society  regard  war  as  an  evil  which  it  is 
wrong  for  governments  wantonly  to  incur, 
which  ought  if  possible  to  be  avoided.  But 
very  few  view  it  as  a  crime.  Eegarding  only 
its  consequences,  men  generally  do  not  con 
sider  it  in  respect  to  its  nature  at  all.  Is  this 
popular  view  of  war  correct,  or  is  it  a  fearful 
error  ? 

The  divine  command,  "  thou  shalt  not  kill," 
has  been  laid  upon  all  mankind.  Murder  is 
regarded  in  a  virtuous  community  with  a  feel 
ing  of  horror.  Men  shrink  from  contact  with 
the  murderer  as  from  pollution.  One  would 
smile,  should  we  ask  if  this  feeling  was  excited 
by  the  expense  to  the  county  which  must  at 
tend  the  trial  and  execution  of  the  murderer, 
or  even  by  the  suffering  his  victim  might  have 
endured,  or  the  grief  and  anguish  the  death 
might  have  caused.  No,  it  is  the  awful  nature 
of  the  deed  itself,  the  enormity  of  the  crime 
of  wantonly  destroying  the  life  of  a  fellow  be 
ing  that  shocks  the  moral  sense  of  community. 
Civilized  men  admit  the  righteousness  of 

\ 


202  REVIEW  OF  THE 


this  command  in  its  application  to  individuals, 
and  murder  is  universally  regarded  as  the  most 
henious  crime  which  man  can  commit,  or  which 
society  is  called  upon  to  punish. 

Now  what  is  there  that  can  make  the  same 
deed  only  a  political  evil  when  committed  by 
community  in  their  collective  capacity,  which 
when  done  by  an  individual  is  the  highest 
crime  known  to  human  or  divine  laws  ?  What 
can  so  change  the  nature  of  this  act  of  taking 
human  life,  and  make  it  now  justifiable  by  po 
litical  necessity,  and  now  only  by  the  necessity 
of  self-preservation  ?  Clearly  nothing.  There 
is  no  difference  between  the  laws  of  public  and 
private  morality.  The  deed  is  the  same  by 
whomsoever  committed.  We  conclude  then 
that  the  popular  sentiment  concerning  war  is 
wrong ;  that  it  is  more  than  a  political  evil, 
that  it  is  murder. 

Has  then  this  truth  that  war  is  a  crime  the 
most  dreadful  that  a  nation  can  commit,  has 
this  truth  the  power,  when  universally  recog 
nized,  to  banish  its  practice  from  among  civil 
ized  nations  ?  Can  the  conviction  that  war  is 
murder  counteract  those  "impulses  of  nature," 
passion,  pride  and  the  desire  for  excitement, 


MEXICAN  WAR.  203 


and  furnish  to  nations  an  ever  active  principle 
which  shall  prompt  them  to  revolt  at  its  per 
petration  ?  It  needs  no  argument  to  prove  the 
affirmative  of  this  question.  Where  war  is  es 
teemed  to  be  murder,  it  will  be  abhorred  as 
murder. 

From  this  truth,  and  from  this  alone,  there 
follow  as  corollaries  that  true  patriotism  nev 
er,  except  as  a  last  resort  against  intolerable 
oppression  and  injury,  or  in  defence  of  life  it 
self,  calls  a  nation  to  engage  in  war,  but  that 
on  the  contrary  its  voice  is  obeyed  only  in  cul 
tivating  the  spirit  of  fraternity  and  peace  with 
all  mankind ;  that  military  renown  is  not  the 
foundation  of  national  glory ;  that  it  is  crimi 
nal  for  enlightened  states  to  make  war  the  ar 
biter  of  their  disputes ;  that  standing  armies, 
except  when  necessary  as  a  protection  against 
savages  or  outlaws,  are  a  disgrace  to  Christian 
governments. 

This  furnishes  us  with  the  true  principle  by 
which  to  determine  what  that  necessity  is 
which  will  justify  a  nation  in  appealing  to 
arms. 

The  act  of  taking  human  life  being  the  same 
in  its  nature  whether  it  is  called  victory  or 


204  REVIEW  OF  THE 

murder,  it  follows  that  the  same  necessity  must 
be  demanded  in  its  justification  whether  it  is 
committed  by  individuals  or  nations. 

Existence  is  the  first  gift  of  God  to  man,  and 
liberty,  the  great  right  of  responsible  beings, 
is  the  second  and  equal  one.  It  is  not  only 
the  right,  it  is  the  highest  duty  of  every  man 
to  defend  his  own  life  and  the  lives  of  others, 
particularly  those  of  whom  he  is  the  natural 
protector,  and  if  otherwise  unable,  to  take  the 
life  of  the  assailant.  So  it  is  the  undoubted 
riglit  and  duty  of  the  African  to  take  the  life 
of  the  slave  pirate,  if  by  that  means  alone  he 
can  secure  his  freedom.  And  these,  imminent 
danger  to  his  life  or  his  liberty,  are  the  only 
circumstances  which  can  justify  a  man  in 
taking  the  life  of  his  fellow  man. 

A  state  is  the  guardian  and  protector  of  its 
people.  It  has  then  the  undoubted  right,  nay, 
more,  it  is  its  most  sacred  duty  to  defend  its' 
own  existence  and  the  lives  and  liberty  of  its 
people  against  an  internal  or  an  external  en 
emy.  It  defends  itself  and  its  citizens  by  the 
same  right  against  the  murderer,  the  conspira 
tor  and  the  invader.  There  is  always  a  wrong, 
a  dreadful  wrong  attending  the  act,  but  it  be- 


MEXICAN  WAR. 


longs  not  to  the  injured  state,  it  lies  with  the 
aggressor  alone. 

It  may  be  said  that  each  nation  must  be  the 
judge  in  its  own  case  when  this  justifying  ne 
cessity  arises.  We  answer  very  true,  and  fal 
lible  human  nature,  blinded  by -a  thousand  pre 
judices,  must  often  err  in  its  judgment.  But 
this  is  no  argument  against  the  existence  of 
the  right.  The  same  objection  would  forbid 
an  individual  to  defend  his  life.  The  cause  of 
peace  has  only  one  hope.  Just  in  proportion 
as  the  moral  sense  of  a  nation  is  cultivated, 
will  that  nation  be  emancipated  from  the  do 
minion  of  prejudice  and  passion,  and  be  fitted 
rightfully  to  determine  when  that  dreadful  ne 
cessity  arises  in  which  duty  commands  an  ap 
peal  to  the  God  of  battles.  It  is  evident  that 
such  an  extreme  necessity  could  hardly  be  pos 
sible  to  arise  between  the  United  States  and 
any  other  Christian  nation. 

The  doctrine  of  non-resistance,  which  asserts 
that  no  possible  necessity  can  ever  justify  war 
in  any  people,  we  think,  and  we  have  endeav 
ored  in  these  observations  to  show  to  be  erro 
neous.  But  it  is  not  merely  erroneous,  it  must 
be  productive  of  unhappy  effects  upon  the 


206  REVIEW  OF  THE 


cause  of  peace.  For  men  can  never  be  persua 
ded  that  it  is  a  crime  to  defend  even  to  the 
last  extremity  that  government  from  over 
throw  which  their  fathers  perchance  have 
reared,  and  under  whose  protection  they  have 
reposed  in  security  and  happiness,  their  homes 
from  violation,  and  those  whom  they  hold 
dear  from  oppression,  slavery  and  death. 

Men  can  never  be  persuaded  that  they  com 
mit  a  crime  in  fighting  for  the  defence  of  those 
objects,  for  whose  safety  they  are  ready  to  of 
fer  up  their  lives.  There  is  an  impulse  in  every 
manly  heart  to  be  free.  Peace,  universal  peace, 
can  be  founded  only  in  its  universal  triumph. 
Bather  than  be  enslaved,  such  a  heart  will 
cease  to  beat.  It  can  never  be  convinced  that 
when  its  freedom  can  be  defended  only  by  the 
death  of  its  oppressor,  it  has  no  longer  any 
right  to  be  free. 

If  this  doctrine  so  abhorrent  to  humanity 
shall  become  associated  in  the  minds  of  men 
with  the  principles  of  peace,  it  must  retard 
their  progress,  and  shut  multitudes  of  brave 
hearts  against  their  reception. 

We  have  now  seen  that  the  consequences  of 
war,  showing  it  only  to  be  a  political  evil,  can 


MEXICAN  WAR.  207 


never  persuade  nations  to  its  abandonment ; 
that  a  conviction  that  it  is  murder,  a  realiza 
tion  of  the  dreadful  nature  of  the  act  itself, 
can  alone  furnish  a  motive  for  its  abolish 
ment  sufficient  to  overcome  those  impulses  of 
our  nature  which  prompt  to  its  continuance, 
and  secure  permanent  peace  among  civilized 
nations. 

What  then  is  the  work  of  the  peace  maker  ? 
It  is  well  to  present  the  expense  and  the  suf 
fering  occasioned  by  war.  The  more  enormous 
its  cost,  and  the  greater  its  injury  in  every  re 
spect  to  the  welfare  of  nations  is  shown  to  be, 
the  more  impolitic  its  practice  must  be  consid 
ered,  and  wars  may  sometimes  be  thus  averted. 
But  these  cannot  avail  to  abolish  armies. 
These  can  form  no  foundation  on  which  the 
civilized  world  can  repose  in  the  security  of 
perpetual  peace. 

Could  a  congress  of  nations,  or  the  insertion 
of  clauses  of  arbitration  in  treaties,  or  any  other 
scheme,  if  adopted  by  nations,  afford  such  a 
foundation  ?  Is  it  the  mission  of  the  peace 
maker  to  contrive  and  labor  for  the  establish 
ment  of  one  or  another  of  these  ? 

We  confess  we  entertain  no  high  opinion  of 


208  REVIEW  OF  THE 

the  utility  of  any  such  contrivances.  We  see 
very  little  in  them  but  harmless  abstractions, 
impracticable  to  be  established  till  the/time  shall 
come  when  they  will  probably  be  useless. 
When  christian'nations  realize  what  war  is,  and 
determine  to  abandon  its  practice ;  when  they 
realize  what  peace  is,  and  determine  to  culti 
vate  its  spirit  and  to  cherish  its  blessings,  they 
will  readily  devise  means,  if  indeed  any  means 
shall  be  necessary,  for  the  attainment  and  secu 
rity  of  the  good  which  they  desire,  and  for 
the  prevention  of  the  wrong  which  they  abhor. 

If  the  principles  of  peace  are  to  govern  the 
conduct  of  nations  at  some  future  day,  the 
means  which  statesmen  may  then  think  proper 
to  adopt  for  carrying  them  into  practice  are  of 
very  little  consequence  to  us  now.  All  that 
can  well  be  left  to  those  who  shall  first  forever 
sheath  the  sword. 

And  on  the  other  hand,  before  such  a  moral 
revolution  shall  be  effected,  though  a  congress 
of  nations,  or  some  other  nicely  adjusted  plan 
for  the  settlement  of  national  disputes  should 
be  established,  voluntary  submission  would  be 
very  unlikely  to  follow  its  decisions.  It  is 
more  than  questionably  whether  in  the  pres- 


MEXICAN  WAR.  209, 


ent  state  of  society  nations  would,  even  in  the 
majority  of  cases,  yield  their  claims  at  the  bid 
of  an  umpire  or  a  tribunal  which  would  have^ 
no  power  of  enforcing  its  judgments. 

Peace  can  find  its  only  security  in  an  exalted 
moral  sense,  a  hatred  of  war  because  it  is  wrong, 
a  love  of  peace  because  its  cultivation  is  right, 
diffused   among  nations   and   throughout  all 
classes  of  society.     Without  this,  every  plan 
which  philanthropic  ingenuity  can  devise  will 
be  visionary  and  vain,  valuable  and  useful  with 
out  doubt  if  all  men  thought  and  felt  as  do  the 
theorists  who  contrived  it,  but  precisely  un- 
adapted  to  society  as  it  is,  beautiful  perhaps 
and  worthless  as  the  republic  of  Plato,  like  a 
corpse  perfect  in  all  its  minutest  parts,  nicely 
adapted  to  the  purposes  for  which  it  is  design 
ed,  but  cold  and  powerless,  unanimated  by  any 
informing  soul,  utterly  destitute  of  the  princi 
ple  of  life. 

When  nations  shall  show  a  mutual  willing 
ness  to  disband  their  armies,  actually  to  put 
out  of  their  hands  the  means  of  injuring  each 
other,  then  and  not  till  then  we  may  reasona 
bly  expect  that  society  will  sustain,  or  more 
likely  find  wholly  unnecessary,  institutions  of 


210  REVIEW  OF  THE 

peace.  But  before  this  time  shall  arrive  a 
great  revolution  must  be  effected  in  the 
thoughts  and  notions  of  men.  Noiseless  and 
unperceived  as  the  flight  of  the  world  through 
space,  it  will  be  a  gradual  awakening  to  truth, 
a  slow  imbibing  of  the  principles  of  justice 
and  peace,  the  still-increasing  influence  of  the 
law  of  kindness  in  the  study,  in  the  workshop^ 
in  the  fields,  in  the  schoolhouse,  in  the  place  of 
worship,  over  all  Christian  lands. 

Here  lies  the  work  of  the  peace  maker.  His 
is  the  labor  to  urge  and  to  guide  this  deep  re 
sistless  movement  of  humanity.  It  is  his  mis 
sion  to  proclaim  first  this  great  truth,  that  war 
is  distinguishable  only  in  its  enormity  from 
murder.  His  it  is  to  implant  in  the  hearts  of 
men  the  deep  conviction  that  war  is  wrong, 
that  it  is  the  greatest  wickedness,  the  most 
abominable  crime  which  society  can  commit, 
for  it  is  only  this  truth,  realized  and  felt,  that 
can  effect  any  enduring  change  in  the  disposi 
tion  r.nd  conduct  of  nations. 

By  these  means  the  moral  sense  of  mankind 
will  become  elevated  and  quickened,  and  the 
feeling  that  the  practice  of  war  is  disgraceful 
to  human  beings  will  come  to  take  deeper  and 


MEXICAN  WAR. 


deeper  hold  upon  community.  As  men  "be 
come  more  and  more  alive  to  the  true  nature 
of  war,  as  in  the  course  of  time  the  feeling  of 
horror  at  its  commission  shall  have  become,  as 
it  ought  to  be,  equal  in  degree  to  that  with 
which  murder  is  regarded  in  a  virtuous  com 
munity,  all  minor  considerations  will  be  swal 
lowed  up,  all  thought  of  its  consequences  will 
be  forgotten,  in  the  sense  of  the  dreadful  wick 
edness  inherent  in  the  act  itself. 

But  the  apostle  of  peace  has  a  still  higher 
truth  to  proclaim  than  that  war  is  wrong. 

There  is  a  deeper  and  broader  foundation 
still  than  this,  on  which  the  cause  of  peace  is 
ordained  to  be  established.  The  truth  whose 
power  we  have  been  considering  is  wholly 
negative  in  its  character.  It  can  counteract 
indeed  for  the  most  part  the  influence  of  the 
passions  in  which  war  has  its  birth,  but  it  can 
not  effect  their  existence,  nor  wholly  destroy 
their  activity. 

Man  has  a  higher  duty  than  to  abandon  war, 
it  is  to  cherish  peace.  There  is  something  bet 
ter  than  the  absence  of  anger,  it  is  the  presence 
of  love.  There  is  a  nobler  truth  than  that 
mankind  should  be  no  more  enemies,  it  is  that 


212 


REVIEW  OF  THE 


they  are  brethren,  the  work  of  a  common  Cre 
ator,  the  partakers  of  a  common  humanity,  the 
common  possessors  of  vast  capacities  and  gift 
ed  alike  with  an  immortal  nature. 

The  love  of  all  mankind — this  indeed  can 
abolish  war,  for  where  it  exists  passion  and  sel 
fishness  and  pride  must  be  extinguished.  Uni 
versal  brotherhood — this  is  the  sun  of  human 
ity,  of  freedom,  of  peace,  before  whose  rising 
fleets  and  armies,  like  morning  mists,  shall  dis 
appear  from  the  face  of  the  earth.  Fraternity 
is  the  all-embracing  principle,  whose  develop 
ment  shall  mark  an  era  in  this  world's  history, 
when  higher  and  more  noble  principles  of  ac 
tion  shall  govern  the  conduct  of  nations,  when 
the  reign  of  violence  shall  give  place  forever 
to  the  reign  of  benevolence  and  love. 

Some  philosophers  declare  that  while  human 
nature  remains  the  same,  peace  among  men 
can  never  be  attained.  We  admit  it.  And 
reasoning  from  their  premises,  the  melancholy 
conclusion  is  inevitable.  These  bright  anti 
cipations  can  never  be  realized.  Nations  will 
never  practically  obey  the  law  of  kindness. 
Prophecy  is  false  War  must  stain  the  earth 
forever. 


MEXICAN  WAR. 


But  they  leave  out  of  view  an  element  of 
human  advancement,  compared  with  which  all 
other  means  for  the  elevation  of  man  sink  to 
nothing.  There  is  a  power  which  can  change 
human  nature.  Christianity,  whose  sublime 
precepts  are  in  perfect  harmony  with  the  prin 
ciples  of  our  moral  being,  whose  miraculous 
agency  can  reach  to  the  impulses  of  the  breast, 
can  calm  the  passions  and  subdue  the  appetites 
of  men,  can  free  the  heart  from  the  dominion  of 
selfishness,  and  establish  over  it  the  empire  of 
love,  Christianity  alone  can  banish  from  the 
earth  a  crime  and  a  curse  which  is  the  offspring 
of  passions,  and  persuade  nations  to  that  justice 
and  forgiveness  which  are  the  attributes  of  God. 

These  observations  indicate  the  true  answer 
to  the  question,  when  shall  the  earth  witness 
the  triumph  of  peace.  There  will  be,  doubt 
less,  many  efforts  made  to  attain  this  end  be 
fore  mankind  shall  be  prepared  for  it.  Admi 
rable  plans  will  be  devised,  not  without  labor 
and  skill,  to  bring  about  what  the  mass  of  men 
do  not  feel  the  need  of,  and  to  suppress  that 
which  they  have  never  realized  to  be  wrong, 
and  over  which  they  do  not  mourn.  Many 
good  men  will  look  upon  their  own  contrivan- 


£14  REVIEW  OF  THE 

ces,  the  only  difficulty  about  whose  operation 
is  that  all  men  do  not  feel  as  they  do,  as  certain 
to  cure,  or  at  least  to  alleviate,  this  scourge  of 
humanity. 

But  the  evil  lies  far  beyond  the  reach  of  any 
such  machinery.  We  have  seen  that  the  age 
of  peace  cannot  arrive,  except  an  abhorrence 
of  war  as  a  crime,  and  a  love  of  all  mankind 
as  brethren  shall  take  root  in  the  hearts  of 
men,  and  grow  and  increase,  until  they  shall 
spread  over  the  world  their  peaceful  shade. 

To  one  whose  view  is  bounded  by  the  pres 
ent  hour,  the  aspect  of  Christendom  must  ap 
pear  full  of  discouragement.     Our  own  nation 
has  recently  passed  through  a  causeless  war 
for  conquest.     Europe  is  resounding  with  the 
din  of  arms.     For  more  than  a  year  and  a  half 
violence  and  confusion  have  filled  her  ancient 
capitals  with   consternation.      Black,  porten- 
tious  clouds  brood  over  the  coming  years.     So 
ciety  is  like  a  strange  and  lonely  river,  which 
in  the  multitude  of  its  windings  seems  to  the 
disheartened  voyager  to  flow  back  forever  to 
the  spot  from  whence  it  came.     But  he  who 
from  some  high  mountain  can  trace  the  stream 
through  the  vast  lanndscape,  beholds  it  among 


MEXICAN  WAR.  215 


confining  rocks  and  hills  steadily  pursuing  its 
only  course,  until  its  windings  ended,  its  turbu 
lence  ceased,  in  the  far  distance  it  emerges  into 
the  open  plain,  and  flows  majestic  to  the  ocean. 
"  The  age  of  chivalry,"  said  a  great  English 
writer,  "  has  passed,  that  of  speculators  and  po 
litical  economists  has  succeeded,  and  the  glory 
of  Europe  has  departed  forever."     He  who, 
unaffected  by  any  such  sentimentalism  as  this, 
intelligently  compares  the  present  with  the  ac 
tual,  not  the  ideal,  past,  will  discover  among 
the  nations  of  Christendom  a  great  and  won 
derful  development  of  mind,  and  progress  in 
the  principles  of  freedom,  justice  and  peace. 
He  will  see  that  the  civilization  of  the  present 
day  possesses  far  different  elements,  and  a  far 
more  exalted  character  than  any  which  the  an 
cient  world  ever  knew. 

He  looks  back  upon  the  barbarous  laws  of 
the  nations  of  Europe  in  the  dark  ages,  which 
regarded  foreigners  as  enemies,  and  gave  up  to 
pillage  and  slavery  the  stranger  cast  upon 
their  inhospitable  shores.  He  remembers  the 
hatred  and  feuds  among  great  subjects  of  the 
same  states  which  found  vent  in  perpetual  pri 
vate  wars ;  barons  who  maintained  their  state 


216  REVIEW  OF  THE 


and  retainers  by  plunder ;  kings  who,  often  im 
potent  to  protect  their  subjects  from  each  other, 
aimed  only  to  compel  their  servile  submission, 
and  to  draw  from  them  as  from  an  estate,  the 
greatest  possible  amount  of  revenue  for  their 
pleasures  and  of  service  for  their  wars;  a 
church  the  foundations  of  whose  power  were 
the  superstition  of  its  worshippers  and  the  am 
bition  of  its  priests  ;  the  intrigues  and  crimes  of 
which  every  court  in  Europe  was  continually 
the  scene  ;  the  lawlessness  and  strife  wrhich  fill 
ed  all  lands  with  violence  in  those  fierce  and 
turbulent  times. 

He  remembers  rooted  national  animosities, 
handed  down  for  centuries,  now  becoming  for 
gotten  and  dead.  He  looks  back  on  ages  of 
persecution  where  now  toleration  reigns,  and 
the  faggot  and  the  stake  have  given  place  to 
the  peaceful,  mighty  pen.  He  reads  how  the 
chivalry  of  Europe  marched  to  conquer  and 
destroy,  where  he  sees  the  missionary  go  to 
teach  and  to  save. 

He  sees  th  eold  selfish  political  dogmas  and 
systems  of  Europe  exploded.  He  beholds  the 
rapid  abolishment  of  all  artificial  destructions 
in  society  and  all  forms  of  rank.  In  the  place 


MEXICAN  WAR.  217 


of  efforts  to  oppress  and  degrade,  lie  witnesses 
exertions  to  raise  up  and  clothe  the  toil-worn 
body  of  humanity.  He  sees  the  press,  a  power 
of  which  "  the  age  of  chivalry"  never  dreamed, 
diffusing  knowledge  and  truth  to  the  remotest 
corners  of  the  earth. 

He  sees  communities  living  in  peace  and 
happiness,  the  sciences  and  arts  which  at  once 
enrich,  adorn  and  elevate  society,  progressing 
with  amazing  rapidity,  commerce  spreading  its 
peaceful  wings  over  the  globe  and  stretching 
its  cords  of  unity  from  shore  to  distant  shore, 
all  under  just  and  equal  institutions  at  once 
their  protection  and  encouragement.  He  be 
holds  society  seeking  in  its  midst  and  to  the 
ends  of  the  earth  objects  for  its  benevolence, 
and  the  horrors  of  war  itself  mitigated  by  hu 
mane  and  generous  laws. 

He  searches  for  the  causes  of  the  wars  and 
commotions  which  are  now  shaking  the  states 
of  Europe.  It  is  whole  races  of  earnest,  so 
ber  men  determined  to  be  free,  rising  to  vin 
dicate  their  great  right  to  think  for  themselves 
and  to  act  for  themselves.  He  considers  the 
struggles  which  men  are  everywhere  making 
to  free  themselves  from  ignorance,  that  dread- 


218  REVIEW  OF  THE 


fill  slavery  of  the  soul.  He  remarks  the  ten 
dency  of  the  age  to  recognize  the  dignity  of 
man  as  man,  the  same  immortal  nature,  still 
high  though  fallen,  the  same  image  of  its  Ma 
ker,  majestic  though  obscured,  in  every  indi 
vidual  that  wears  the  form  of  humanity. 

He  sees  the  principles  of  peace  beginning  to 
receive  the  serious  consideration  of  men.  A 
year  ago  a  world's  convention  of  the  friends 
of  peace  assembled  at  Brussels.  Some  of  the 
great  political  minds  of  Europe  took  part  in 
its  proceedings.  The  premier  of  England  ex 
pressed  his  warm  sympathy  with  the  cause  in 
which  they  were  engaged.  The  journals  of 
England  and  the  continent,  united  in  express 
ing  the  highest  respect  for  its  character  and  its 
objects.  While  we  write,  a  similar  convention 
is  setting  in  Paris.  A  century  ago  these  men, 
could  such  men  have  been  found,  would  have 
been  ridiculed  as  visionaries.  ISTow  all  intelli 
gent  minds  bid  them  God  speed  in  their  glo 
rious  work. 

All  these  things  must  have  a  cause.  The 
ancient  world  attained  to  no  such  civilization 
as  this.  Its  civilization  was  little  else  than  an 
awakening  of  the  intellect.  That  of  this  age 


MEXICAN  WAR. 


is  moreover  the  exaltation  of  the  nature  of 
man.  It  is  the  attainment  of  higher  and  jnster 
principles  for  the  government  of  society,  the 
development  of  nobler  feelings  and  kindlier 
sympathies  in  the  hearts  of  men.  To  what 
shall  this  be  ascribed?  Christianity,  which 
alone  has  ever  awakened  in  man  the  feeling  of 
universal  philanthropy,  or  revealed  to  him  the 
sublime  truth  of  universal  brotherhood,  must 
be  regarded  as  the  great  element  of  modern 
civilization,  not  only  distinguishing  it  in  these 
respects,  but  giving  to  it  an  ever  progressive 
character,  by  revealing  forever  higher  ends  for 
human  attainment,  affording  grander  objects 
of  thought,  a  nobler  standard  and  examples  of 
excellence,  and  more  glorious  motives  for  the 
practice  of  virtue. 

Now  in  view  of  these  things,  we  can  look 
toward  the  future  with  more  than  a  blind 
faith.  We  know  that  Europe  must  be  eman 
cipated.  That  the  struggle  must  go  on  until 
the  men  of  Christendom  shall  establish  forever 
their  independence  and  equality.  Will  hu 
manity  stop  there  ?  No,  the  work  is  but  half 
done,  until  the  thoughts  of  every  man  among 
the  great  nations  of  the  world  shall  be  refined, 


220  MEXICAN  WAR. 


liberalized,  ennobled  by  the  genius  of  univer 
sal  education. 

Then  will  follow  peace.  Then  must  be  at 
tained  this  crowning  glory  of  civilization,  when 
armies  and  navies  with  all  the  science  and  mag 
nificence  of  this  dreadful  crime  shall  follow 
the  spirit  of  hatred  to  the  tomb. 

Freedom  and  education  are  the  sisters  of 
peace.  Daughters  of  religion,  they  dwell  in 
an  eternal  unity. 


THE  END. 


ff. 

•• 


r 


